Compromise

Don’t like a particular mechanic? “Get rid of it.” Simple and easy solution, isn’t it? But is it the best solution? Or the right solution?
Answer: No.
A return to “classic” gameplay will not solve anything. It won’t bring the population back, it won’t put Halo back at the top for at #1 for the highest population game played at any given time. This has been made obviously apparent at the fact that despite how Halo: Reach and Halo 4 “bombed”, Halo 3’s numbers didn’t sky-rocket from the legions of people leaving Halo: Reach/Halo 4 that preferred “classic” gameplay. Halo 3’s population only past Halo 4’s recently because the game was made free.
So… if completely cutting disliked mechanics and returning to “classic” gameplay won’t be the best solutions, what is there to do?
Compromise.
There’s a middle ground between what “classic” people want, and where Halo needs to go to remain a contender in the current FPS market.
For example, Sprint. Sprint will no doubt remain a core mechanic in Halo 5 and Halo 6. Some people don’t like it, some people do. How can there be compromise?
Making an Enable/Disable Sprint option for both dev-side and player-side would be the most obvious. This would allow both 343 and custom games to create “more classic” gameplay with no Sprint. Refining Sprint so it’s more balanced vs. getting shot and running up to melee’ing someone is also another compromise instead of cutting the feature altogether.
Compromise can be made with the aspects of loadouts, too, such as placing some of the “stronger” loadout weapons such as the DMR and LightRifle on the map. They wouldn’t be “stronger” in that they do more damage than a comparable loadout precision weapon, but just perform better at range and in general than the Battle Rifle, for example. So instead of spawning with a long-range weapon at the start (unless specified otherwise), they need to be pick up on the map.
There’s plenty room for compromise. The community just needs to be more open about it.

> Don’t like a particular mechanic? “Get rid of it.” Simple and easy solution, isn’t it? But is it the best solution? Or the right solution?
> Answer: No.
> A return to “classic” gameplay will not solve anything. It won’t bring the population back, it won’t put Halo back at the top for at #1 for the highest population game played at any given time. This has been made obviously apparent at the fact that despite how Halo: Reach and Halo 4 “bombed”, Halo 3’s numbers didn’t sky-rocket from the legions of people leaving Halo: Reach/Halo 4 that preferred “classic” gameplay. Halo 3’s population only past Halo 4’s recently because the game was made free.
> So… if completely cutting disliked mechanics and returning to “classic” gameplay won’t be the best solutions, what is there to do?
> Compromise.
> There’s a middle ground between what “classic” people want, and where Halo needs to go to remain a contender in the current FPS market.
> For example, Sprint. Sprint will no doubt remain a core mechanic in Halo 5 and Halo 6. Some people don’t like it, some people do. How can there be compromise?
> Making an Enable/Disable Sprint option for both dev-side and player-side would be the most obvious. This would allow both 343 and custom games to create “more classic” gameplay with no Sprint. Refining Sprint so it’s more balanced vs. getting shot and running up to melee’ing someone is also another compromise instead of cutting the feature altogether.
> Compromise can be made with the aspects of loadouts, too, such as placing some of the “stronger” loadout weapons such as the DMR and LightRifle on the map. They wouldn’t be “stronger” in that they do more damage than a comparable loadout precision weapon, but just perform better at range and in general than the Battle Rifle, for example. So instead of spawning with a long-range weapon at the start (unless specified otherwise), they need to be pick up on the map.
> There’s plenty room for compromise. The community just needs to be more open about it.

EpicGamerMonkey, you’ve posted the greatest post I’ve seen all month, and it’s something that needs to happen, and people need to start compromising a little more instead of having the “It’s my way or the highway” mentality that’s been plaguing the human race as of late.

I think that you’re missing some pretty big factors in your first statement. It should be obvious and unsurprising that players didn’t flock back to Halo 3 after Reach and Halo 4 came out. Simply put, Halo 3 is outdated and an old game, but by no means does that mean the game was bad or less enjoyed by players. Pretty much everyone played the hell out of Halo 3, they eventually grew tired of it though as it offered nothing new. Cue Reach & H4, many players didn’t enjoy them as much as H3, but since they had played H3 so much they didn’t want to go back to it; they wanted something new but similar to H3, and since later games didn’t give that feeling players moved on to other games.

The answer isn’t to keep Halo going with these generic FPS features that have been added as of late, and not everything can be compromised on to make everyone happy. Decisions need to be made in the best interests of the game and, what at least used to be, its community.

Features like Sprint, Jetpack, AC as an AA, and PV have been shown to generally harm the game. Sprint negatively influences map design, prolongs encounters, and acts a crutch to help lesser skilled players survive situations where they should’ve died.

I could go on but I’ll be brief, these features hurt the game in ways that can throw-off and frustrate players. While they may be able to find a place in Halo, whether that be in Custom Games or certain gametypes like Invasion, the basic gameplay is not the place they should be.

Good post OP.

A couple of things that came to my mind when reading it though:

  1. Halo 3 is old now, so even making it free won’t make many people return to it. But a new game in the Halo 3 mould may be incredibly popular, I don’t think you can discount such a thing just because people haven’t flocked back to Halo 3.

  2. Sprint yes/no or either. I like the either option too but surely that would pose a dilemma. Halo 4’s maps are pretty large, probably with the ever-present sprint in mind. If they had it as an on/off feature it may cause problems with how maps would work in terms of their size, they could feel too big or too small depending on if sprint is off/on.

I don’t know, maybe I’m waffling a bit but those are a couple of points that I thought of when reading your post.

Still, it was a good post and I agree with it to an extent, certainly the main idea of ‘compromise’.

Compromise is necessary, but some features DO need to be removed and not fixed. Perks, for instance.

Sprint will stay, but can be made better. Desprint ing when being shot would completely remove the annoyance of it and make it more of a way to move around the map faster as opposed to an escape button. The speed boost that Sprint grants would also be smaller, making maps smaller too, and hurting map design less. Then there’d be no major issues from Sprint.

Loadouts are easy: remove perks and don’t allow a grenade choice (frags only). Then remove and replace the Plasma Pistol and the Boltshot (unless it is significantly altered) in the secondaries. Who doesn’t want to see the SMG and Plasma Rifle return as secondaries? Jet packs and Active Camo should not be a loadout option, but rather appear on the map in specific maps and customs (they break game too much).

Ordnance should cease to be random and should fill a more similar role to weapons on the map (though I would much prefer weapons on the map). Weapon indicators for the more powerful power weapons (Rocket Launcher, Sniper…) are also understandable. Personal Ordnance should go away unless nerfed to the level of minor boosts, basically everything removed from Loadouts- non-frag grenades, the more powerful AAs and speciality weapons such as the Plasma Pistol and the Boltshot (but nothing too powerful- no Rocket Launchers and Snipers here). Another option is to have ordnance stations, specific locations on maps where players need to go to get their POs (which will instantly become choke points on the map).

As for the rest… I think there should be a Legendary playlist (the classic playlist) at launch, and I think there should be at least one “ranked” (hyper competitive playlists with visible CSR) playlist too- with the options of adding more as the weeks and months progress. The rest could have their Loadouts, but we should have one playlist where we can revisit a more stripped down experience (and truer to the originals) alongside a more modern, yet still balanced experience.

If it was really up to me, though, I would split the Multiplayer between Legendary and Infinity evenly- each mode being its own thing and not requiring the other to be nerfed or altered, but we’re talking about compromises here.

> Answer: No.

I don’t see why people have to compromise on everything about the game. That just leaves you with a giant mess of ineffective, poorly designed game mechanics.

> A return to “classic” gameplay will not solve anything. It won’t bring the population back, it won’t put Halo back at the top for at #1 for the highest population game played at any given time.

This much is likely true. The fanbase is so divided that 343I is pretty much in a bad spot regardless of what they do.

As for Halo 3, it’s an old, dead game. Old, dead games tend to remain old and dead, regardless of their gameplay. Halo PC is still my favorite game, but I still play the latest Halo’s only because it’s very difficult to find a good match in Halo PC.

I could say “CoD4’s structure has fallen out of favor because everyone plays Black Ops 2 instead of CoD4”. That’s not necessarily a true assertion. It could just mean people want to play the game that has the most players and attention around it, and are willing to sacrifice some of their preferences for this.

Brilliant post, OP.

So many posters here make the mistake of dismissing a new feature because they assume the next iteration of it will remain unchanged, which is almost 100% of the time never the case. Sure, it was bad here, but try to fix it before throwing it out.

Halo 4’s biggest problem, IMHO, was too much, too soon, too little tested.

If Halo 5 hypothetically keeps, say, 50% of prior Halo (CE-4) features and hones them into something more balanced/sharper/enjoyable/competitive/whatever, and then throws in 1, maybe 2 equally well-crafted new features, you could have something very special, indeed.

> Compromise is necessary, but some features DO need to be removed and not fixed. Perks, for instance.
>
> Sprint will stay, but can be made better. Desprint ing when being shot would completely remove the annoyance of it and make it more of a way to move around the map faster as opposed to an escape button. The speed boost that Sprint grants would also be smaller, making maps smaller too, and hurting map design less. Then there’d be no major issues from Sprint.
>
> Loadouts are easy: remove perks and don’t allow a grenade choice (frags only). Then remove and replace the Plasma Pistol and the Boltshot (unless it is significantly altered) in the secondaries. Who doesn’t want to see the SMG and Plasma Rifle return as secondaries? Jet packs and Active Camo should not be a loadout option, but rather appear on the map in specific maps and customs (they break game too much).
>
> Ordnance should cease to be random and should fill a more similar role to weapons on the map (though I would much prefer weapons on the map). Weapon indicators for the more powerful power weapons (Rocket Launcher, Sniper…) are also understandable. Personal Ordnance should go away unless nerfed to the level of minor boosts, basically everything removed from Loadouts- non-frag grenades, the more powerful AAs and speciality weapons such as the Plasma Pistol and the Boltshot (but nothing too powerful- no Rocket Launchers and Snipers here). Another option is to have ordnance stations, specific locations on maps where players need to go to get their POs (which will instantly become choke points on the map).
>
> As for the rest… I think there should be a Legendary playlist (the classic playlist) at launch, and I think there should be at least one “ranked” (hyper competitive playlists with visible CSR) playlist too- with the options of adding more as the weeks and months progress. The rest could have their Loadouts, but we should have one playlist where we can revisit a more stripped down experience (and truer to the originals) alongside a more modern, yet still balanced experience.
>
> If it was really up to me, though, I would split the Multiplayer between Legendary and Infinity evenly- each mode being its own thing and not requiring the other to be nerfed or altered, but we’re talking about compromises here.

That would split the community too much.

Here’s the be all end all, in my opinion:

Have a system combining 3’s and Reach, Social/Competitive and a credit system for unlocking stuff (armor, stances)

Keep loadouts (balance better), remove personal ordinance, AA’s as map pickups and well designed maps for all of this.

Done.

While I do think 343 will compromise, although I don’t think its going to be changes that effects the whole game unless its new additions to gameplay and changes that blends well with the new additions. I think it would be more like the option to have a feature toggable(depends on that feature) , not completely removed .

> Don’t like a particular mechanic? “Get rid of it.” Simple and easy solution, isn’t it? But is it the best solution? Or the right solution?
> Answer: No.
> A return to “classic” gameplay will not solve anything. It won’t bring the population back, it won’t put Halo back at the top for at #1 for the highest population game played at any given time. This has been made obviously apparent at the fact that despite how Halo: Reach and Halo 4 “bombed”, Halo 3’s numbers didn’t sky-rocket from the legions of people leaving Halo: Reach/Halo 4 that preferred “classic” gameplay. Halo 3’s population only past Halo 4’s recently because the game was made free.
> So… if completely cutting disliked mechanics and returning to “classic” gameplay won’t be the best solutions, what is there to do?
> Compromise.
> There’s a middle ground between what “classic” people want, and where Halo needs to go to remain a contender in the current FPS market.
> For example, Sprint. Sprint will no doubt remain a core mechanic in Halo 5 and Halo 6. Some people don’t like it, some people do. How can there be compromise?
> Making an Enable/Disable Sprint option for both dev-side and player-side would be the most obvious. This would allow both 343 and custom games to create “more classic” gameplay with no Sprint. Refining Sprint so it’s more balanced vs. getting shot and running up to melee’ing someone is also another compromise instead of cutting the feature altogether.
> Compromise can be made with the aspects of loadouts, too, such as placing some of the “stronger” loadout weapons such as the DMR and LightRifle on the map. They wouldn’t be “stronger” in that they do more damage than a comparable loadout precision weapon, but just perform better at range and in general than the Battle Rifle, for example. So instead of spawning with a long-range weapon at the start (unless specified otherwise), they need to be pick up on the map.
> There’s plenty room for compromise. The community just needs to be more open about it.

Finally someone else willing to compromise!

> While I do think 343 will compromise, although I don’t think its going to be changes that effects the whole game unless its new additions to gameplay and changes that blends well with the new additions. I think it would be more like the option to have a feature toggable(depends on that feature) , not completely removed .

Keep loadouts (balance better), remove personal ordinance, AA’s as map pickups except sprint and develop greatly designed maps for all of this.

Compromising is not always the answer.

I want a game that KNOWS what it is, NOT a game that tries to please everyone. <mark>You can’t please everyone.</mark> 343 needs to pick ONE side, and the most logical choice would be the Classic gameplay.

However, 343 can still add NEW, MODERN ideas, like a Spectator Mode, and something akin to CoD TV. “Modernizing” a game doesn’t mean we should put in gameplay mechanics that might clash with Halo, but actual MODERN aspects of this generation of games, such as the growing emphasis of “E-Sports” and streaming media, like Twitch.

> Compromising is not always the answer.
>
> I want a game that KNOWS what it is, NOT a game that tries to please everyone. <mark>You can’t please everyone.</mark>343 needs to pick ONE side, and the most logical choice would be the Classic gameplay.
>
> However, 343 can still add NEW, MODERN ideas, like a Spectator Mode, and something akin to CoD TV. “Modernizing” a game doesn’t mean we should put in gameplay mechanics that might clash with Halo, but actual MODERN aspects of this generation of games, such as the growing emphasis of “E-Sports” and streaming media, like Twitch.

We’ll see, times are a changing my friend.

> > While I do think 343 will compromise, although I don’t think its going to be changes that effects the whole game unless its new additions to gameplay and changes that blends well with the new additions. I think it would be more like the option to have a feature toggable(depends on that feature) , not completely removed .
>
> Keep loadouts (balance better), remove personal ordinance, AA’s as map pickups except sprint and develop greatly designed maps for all of this.

They could but it will probably be restricted to some playlists , like PODs are for infinity based gametypes.

> Compromising is not always the answer.
>
> I want a game that KNOWS what it is, NOT a game that tries to please everyone. <mark>You can’t please everyone.</mark> 343 needs to pick ONE side, and the most logical choice would be the Classic gameplay.
>
> However, 343 can still add NEW, MODERN ideas, like a Spectator Mode, and something akin to CoD TV. “Modernizing” a game doesn’t mean we should put in gameplay mechanics that might clash with Halo, but actual MODERN aspects of this generation of games, such as the growing emphasis of “E-Sports” and streaming media, like Twitch.

A developer compromising on a controversial matter is better than completely axing a feature because a group of people dislike it as is. Axing a feature means depriving those that actually like said feature.
There’s always room for improvement, always room to make things better. The state of a feature in on game might be improved and more accepted in the next.
A developer choosing “sides” is the worst road to take. As I said, a return to “classic” gameplay won’t save the franchise, it will only quicken it’s death. That’s not to say 343 should completely neglect the “classic” gameplay. The “classic” gameplay can live on in select gametypes and options for custom games, but the “vanilla” gameplay of the new installments must always be a priority. Even then, the “vanilla” gameplay can always contain “classic” elements. Therefore “compromise” is made.
We do not need any more forced division of the community. We are already doing that to ourselves. We need to accept compromise to bring together the multiple aspects of the community. Without it, 343 won’t have failed the community, the community will have failed Halo. Microsoft won’t allow Halo to die. The community, however, will.

> Compromising is not always the answer.
>
> I want a game that KNOWS what it is, NOT a game that tries to please everyone. You can’t please everyone. 343 needs to pick ONE side, <mark>and the most logical choice would be the Classic gameplay.</mark>
>
> However, 343 can still add NEW, MODERN ideas, like a Spectator Mode, and something akin to CoD TV. “Modernizing” a game doesn’t mean we should put in gameplay mechanics that might clash with Halo, but actual MODERN aspects of this generation of games, such as the growing emphasis of “E-Sports” and streaming media, like Twitch.

Why do people still think that a 100% classic game is the way to go?

Come fall 2014, Halo 5 will be going up against COD Ghosts 2 and probably Battlefield 5, and you want to release Halo 3 HD (basically) in there?

Unfortunately, because of the way the games market is evolving, Halo has to evolve as well to remain a decent contender for the mass audience.
The Waypoint community is not the Mass Audience. We are the fairly small percentage of the total audience who frequent the forums and voice our opinions.

The Mass Audience are people who play the game, enjoy the game, and come back to the game from time to time in between COD and GTA.
Or in the worst case scenario, such as my younger brother, he’ll buy a game, play it until the next big game comes out, and the first game will get stashed in a draw somewhere never to visit a disc-tray again!

If Halo 5 was basically Halo 3 re-skinned, yeah it would make a lot of the old hands happy, but it wouldn’t sell.
Going back to my younger brother, not to long ago I lent him Halo CEA to see if I could get him in to the games. You want to know the first thing he asked me?
“How do I sprint?”, followed quickly by, “How do I scope?”(holding the AR).

I literally face-palmed.

But it was at that moment I realised that he, and people like him make up a lot of the gaming community as a whole, and as much as I hate to admit it, Halo needs to cater to the likes of him if its to remain profitable.
The only solution is compromise, giving ‘classic players’ what they want, while still making the game modern and appealing to the Mass Audience.

> Compromising is not always the answer.
>
> I want a game that KNOWS what it is, NOT a game that tries to please everyone. <mark>You can’t please everyone.</mark> 343 needs to pick ONE side, and the most logical choice would be the Classic gameplay.
>
> However, 343 can still add NEW, MODERN ideas, like a Spectator Mode, and something akin to CoD TV. “Modernizing” a game doesn’t mean we should put in gameplay mechanics that might clash with Halo, but actual MODERN aspects of this generation of games, such as the growing emphasis of “E-Sports” and streaming media, like Twitch.

It’s people like you that makes me happy that Infinity was the only option in Halo 4 for the first 9 months until a Classic playlist was released.

Satisfying both is the best option. Getting rid of either party would be a very stupid move.

> > Compromising is not always the answer.
> >
> > I want a game that KNOWS what it is, NOT a game that tries to please everyone. <mark>You can’t please everyone.</mark> 343 needs to pick ONE side, and the most logical choice would be the Classic gameplay.
> >
> > However, 343 can still add NEW, MODERN ideas, like a Spectator Mode, and something akin to CoD TV. “Modernizing” a game doesn’t mean we should put in gameplay mechanics that might clash with Halo, but actual MODERN aspects of this generation of games, such as the growing emphasis of “E-Sports” and streaming media, like Twitch.
>
> It’s people like you that makes me happy that Infinity was the only option in Halo 4 for the first 9 months until a Classic playlist was released.
>
> Satisfying both is the best option. Getting rid of either party would be a very stupid move.

Yes, Infinity was the only option in Halo 4 for the first 9 months. And you know what happened? The population dropped by 95% within that time. So 5% of the original population still enjoy Halo 4 enough to this day to keep playing it. No Halo game has ever dropped in population this quickly, not even Reach. It’s safe to say that Halo 4 was not the best way to go with the franchise.

But you’re right, some people prefer Halo 4. So what? Does that mean that focusing 50/50 on both groups for Halo 5 is the best idea? Why should 5% of the population get as much attention as the rest of the 95% of the game?

If 343i must really cater to both groups through a compromise, then why not make the majority of the game based off of traditional Halo, and then create one or two playlists with Infinity settings? That way, the little 5% of players get their playlist that has Halo 4-esque gameplay, while the rest of the community get a more standard, classic Halo game that has new innovations that work well within the Halo mold.

> > Compromising is not always the answer.
> >
> > I want a game that KNOWS what it is, NOT a game that tries to please everyone. You can’t please everyone. 343 needs to pick ONE side, <mark>and the most logical choice would be the Classic gameplay.</mark>
> >
> > However, 343 can still add NEW, MODERN ideas, like a Spectator Mode, and something akin to CoD TV. “Modernizing” a game doesn’t mean we should put in gameplay mechanics that might clash with Halo, but actual MODERN aspects of this generation of games, such as the growing emphasis of “E-Sports” and streaming media, like Twitch.
>
> Why do people still think that a 100% classic game is the way to go?
>
> Come fall 2014, Halo 5 will be going up against COD Ghosts 2 and probably Battlefield 5, and you want to release Halo 3 HD (basically) in there?

Where did he ever say he wants Halo 3 HD instead of Halo 5? Please point it out to me, because from the way I’m looking at it, it seems that you either don’t care or understand that Halo’s classic gameplay can still be expanded on in many ways that can still attract the mass audience of gamers.

Loadouts, Sprint, Perks, and Killstreaks are not needed to make a FPS game good or even remotely enjoyable. Do I really need to explain this?