creative solutions

Before I start, let’s clarify;

I’m a halophile, just a player that loves to play, used to occasionally play mlg but not competitive, and I don’t know a damn about the dev process. I am a bit frustrated with the game I’ve chosen to love tho, and I’ve been thinking about some stuff to help.

Also, halo should be halo and be as far away from modern shooters as possible, because after all we are Spartans from 2552, not present day marines.

That being said, even tho I hate cod I do love battlefield, and I think 2 things from bf could help a lot and not change core halo gameplay…

First is a server browser. Omfg, the one in battlefield is amazing, and a server browser could FIX THE DLC PLAY TIME ISSUE. If we had a browser, not only could we choose out favorite playlists but we could search by MAP, so the FEW of us with the dlc could play what we paid for!!! (What a concept) this wouldn’t be too drastic, and could stimulate the custom game and forge scenes to new levels. And, this shouldn’t affect the current way of choosing by playlist (bf has both)

The other thing is destructible environments. It’s brutal in bf 4, and I think it’s totally reasonable/plausible that Spartans can change the landscape. From what I understand, the reason h4 is not mlg anymore is because of “randomness” detracting from competitive play (like AA, flinching, especially ordnance killstreaks). Being able to change the environment might make more randomness I admit, but I think the tactical possibilities outweigh that issue(especially if ordnance and all that are fixed in some way). Think about how dominion might change for the better if the “c” base on exile was reduced to rubble by the last few minutes. Thus idea may be more suited for objective playlists, idk, and may be more radical, but it is the lesser of my 2 points.

Just wanted o put these out there, because I am not fully pleased with the changes 343 implemented, but I get where they’re coming from; they have to make their mark as a new developer, but I think in doing that they didn’t establish the fundamentals of halo. True halo core principles should be established first and THEN innovation. I don’t truly hate h4(graphics and mechanics are awesome), but what I was really hoping for was h3 with new maps and Sprint standard(at least got that!); what I got is a cod/reach hybrid, which is better than reach and overall ok, but the populations prove the point. H3 is still competitive/king; h4 could have been that way but no beta testing and cod inspirations didn’t let that happen. I’m trying to trust that 343 will actually listen to us, bc I know I’m not the only one that misses h2/h3 and would like a game that is all new yet pays clear respect to h2/h3 legacy, not reach / cod -Yoink!- pandering to the masses

I’m with ya, pal.

I think the fundamental error 343i made was building upon Reach. I love Reach to death. It’s my favorite Halo game. But, it’s a spinoff. Just like ODST. The matchmaking team should have been locked in a room for 6 months to a year and only allowed to play Halo 3. After living, breathing, and eating Halo 3 and nothing else, only then should they have been allowed to even think about Halo 4.

When you’re making a new game you take risks. When you are given control of an established successful game, risks should be tempered. ODST and Reach were matchmaking experiments. That’s the best way to be risky. Taking large risks in your main title, especially when you’re new at it, can be rewarding if you can pull it off. That’s a big if.

My concern now is that moving to servers provides a lot of technical candy that may be hard to resist. Lack of restraint could mean Halo 5 (or whatever they’re going to call it) may well be totally unrecognizable. I don’t have any problems with the OP’s suggestions, but I worry that my next SPARTAN might be more like a Marvel Comics superhero than a UNSC Marine/Soldier.

Halo and CoD are compared primarily because they are military-based shooters. CoD’s problem is that they’re running out of enemies. In order to keep it up they’re going to have to resort to fighting extraterrestrials, human and alien. Halo’s already there so it has the edge. Giving SPARTANs abilities is fine, but those abilities must have military significance. Perhaps a long talk with some real combat veterans might provide some insight. Halo should be combat oriented, not gadget oriented. Strategic/Tactical combat should take precedence over “chaotic gameplay.”

My concern now is that moving to servers provides a lot of technical candy that may be hard to resist. Lack of restraint could mean Halo 5 (or whatever they’re going to call it) may well be totally unrecognizable. I don’t have any problems with the OP’s suggestions, but I worry that my next SPARTAN might be more like a Marvel Comics superhero than a UNSC Marine/Soldier.

Halo and CoD are compared primarily because they are military-based shooters. CoD’s problem is that they’re running out of enemies. In order to keep it up they’re going to have to resort to fighting extraterrestrials, human and alien. Halo’s already there so it has the edge. Giving SPARTANs abilities is fine, but those abilities must have military significance. Perhaps a long talk with some real combat veterans might provide some insight. Halo should be combat oriented, not gadget oriented. Strategic/Tactical combat should take precedence over “chaotic gameplay.”
[/quote]
I see, I’d say I agree with all that, especially your last point. What’s your opinion about more destructible environment and server browser? Like I said, I do love battlefield too (not like halo tho) and those are pretty chief elements

No to servers IMO, they lack an effective trueskill system to match players with evenly skilled players.

I’m fine with a sub-matchmaking custom hybrid system that allows this though, I just demand a certain level of quality for matchmaking which the BF system does not provide.

What dark5knight said minus first paragraph

> What’s your opinion about more destructible environment and server browser? Like I said, I do love battlefield too (not like halo tho) and those are pretty chief elements

Destructible environments might mean larger maps than what we’re used to so that things don’t get too cluttered. That’s why destroyed vehicles and dead bodies disappear now. If destroyed building pieces and vehicles remained on the map they could be used as cover and add a more realistic element. I’m all for it.

If server browsers can fix current matchmaking issues I’m all for that as well. The way you described it sounds pretty good to me.

Idk if that’s true just because I haven’t seen any evidence that true skill works for -Yoink- in mm, I get paired with rookies and hxc no lifers too. Not trying to be argumentative but I think trueskill is as broken servers, especially now that there’s no competitive scene/visible ranking

> The other thing is destructible environments. It’s brutal in bf 4, and I think it’s totally reasonable/plausible that Spartans can change the landscape. From what I understand, the reason h4 is not mlg anymore is because of “randomness” detracting from competitive play (like AA, flinching, especially ordnance killstreaks). Being able to change the environment might make more randomness I admit, but I think the tactical possibilities outweigh that issue(especially if ordnance and all that are fixed in some way). Think about how dominion might change for the better if the “c” base on exile was reduced to rubble by the last few minutes. Thus idea may be more suited for objective playlists, idk, and may be more radical, but it is the lesser of my 2 points.

I’m just going to say that destructible environments is a giant “no no” for me.

Not only would it drastically alter map design and lead to redundant map flow, but it wouldn’t work with Forge. When you have a phased object interacting with another, both of them are locked in place. If a destructible object were phased with another one, destroying it would result in massive clipping issues that would decrease framerate by the thousands.

If you go into Forge and place two of the same objects in the exact same coordinate and rotation and switch one of them to “normal”, the game will freeze due to the normal object being stuck inside of the phased one’s collision model as it tries to escape from it.

Halo 5 needs dedicated severs no if ands or buts about it. It would allow lag to be reduced greatly and would allow the return of projectile weapons instead of hitscan. I had crazy idea what if Halo 5 had loadouts but you did not spawn with them. Instead you would need to pick them up on the map. Also how about nerfing sprint in small player count gametypes by having a shield penalty and the stunning of players for a second or two. Also making AAs battery based meaning limited usage and having to fight over their spawn.

Andycu5 idk if that is true bc bf4 does it just fine, and were talking about halo for the next gen console so with increased frame rate and faster os… also there has never been a destructible element in any halo before so how is what you said anything but conjecture? Once again, not to be argumentative but it seems like you took what I said out of context. My other question is why you think that would be worse than what it is now, with people phasing thru floors on complex and massive lag and such… ?

> Andycu5 idk if that is true bc bf4 does it just fine, and were talking about halo for the next gen console so with increased frame rate and faster os… also there has never been a destructible element in any halo before so how is what you said anything but conjecture? Once again, not to be argumentative but it seems like you took what I said out of context. My other question is why you think that would be worse than what it is now, with people phasing thru floors on complex and massive lag and such… ?

First of all, Battlefield 4 doesn’t have a Forge, so there isn’t any concern with it. We may be talking about better hardware, that is true, but that doesn’t negate the fact that there would still be enormous problems that occur when one object can’t escape the collision model of another.

Would you want a restricted Forge mode just so that you can destroy a limited number of walls?

I sure wouldn’t.

See idk if I would because I’m not much of a forger, and i don’t see how these problems you describe couldn’t be avoided by forgers just being careful. Also let me be more clear, this idea is not meant to fundamentally change the game mechanics; graphically and mechanically h4 is really good IMO. I’m talking about an innovation 343 can consider applying to matchmaking to ENHANCE COMPETITIVE matchmaking. Because a huge majority of these posts are about how 343 screwed mm with random elements like more aa and ordnance drops; I’m proposing is as a way of possibly adding a tactical element to bring gamers back to the franchise, without making the gAme rely on COD like gadgets. Just to get people thinking because all I want from halo is tactical competitive play, even tho I do love what extras like forge add to that

Fix it yes, but it should definitely stay for a few reasons

Maps can still be small IF designed better, as someone else said

It was flawed in reach and h4, and instead removing it give it a more limited use with a cool down timer (like an armor overdrive or something )

The realism and necessity debate is ridiculous; yes Spartans could dual wield rockets and Sprint, but only one of is viable for competitive play. The running and gunning thing is equally ridiculous; to nerd out the chief has to dip out and relocate in a hurry against the flood several times, and the speed of Spartans sprinting in their armor is mentioned several times in the books. It’s on of the only real tactical innovations 343 gave that is fair[reasonable]

By that I mean, if you’re near cover or good at Sprint-strafe, you deserve to live. I’ve picked off tons of fools that thought Sprint could save them, and used it to escape someone that got cocky and thought thy had the kill on lock as many times. Consequently I’ve had both those situations happen to me as well.

Sprint is one of the ONLY things I’ll defend about h4 because running is DEFINITELY a viable tactical option. Map design can be smarter to compensate for it, or give it limited uses (like grenades; maybe you get 3 sprints each spawn) or a cool down to penalize spamming it; personally I hope it stays standard a d 343 makes better maps now that they have experience, and tweaking it would be aight. Not to be a hater, but everyone against it sounds like they’re crying cuz they can’t get the kill fast enough; I say use it to your advantage to wreck scrubs

Sorry ignore that “fix it” post, meant to put it on the Sprint topic, which we should all check out!