Devs don't get it: H5 going the wrong way

So the H5 footage couldn’t have been more disappointing to me as a longtime Halo player and fan, and I do not think that Halo 5 will be the shot in the arm the franchise needs in order to make new games as popular as old ones. If they get the issues fixed with the MCC, I believe the MCC will have the larger long-term player base.

What I believe the developers think, from Reach/H4/H5 reveal:
Halo needs to borrow elements from other shooters to “keep up”, “innovate”, and “stay relevant” (whatever those things may mean). Day 1 sales are the ultimate concern.
This means sprint, ADS, loadouts, special abilities, etc. Bungie clearly thought this was the way to go with Reach, and 343i thought it was the way to go with H4. I won’t argue against those things here, other than to say that the decline of the player base speaks for itself. I understand some people like Reach and some people like Halo 4. That’s fine. But on the whole, the games have worked hard to put Halo multiplayer on life support. That this is the case is not an arguable point. It is arguable WHY this is the case, and I am making this post because I believe the devs do not understand WHY.

Now, I was HOPING that 343i would return to what made Halo so great in the first place, because they have stated that they want to return to the competitive arena roots of the series. However, let’s look at what a competitive arena game actually looks like, and what the core factors are that made CE/2/3 such great games:
1) Even starts, NO loadouts of any kind
2) Even gameplay; ALL gameplay outcomes are determined 100% by the skill of the player(s)
3) Arena/map-control based play which is centered on teamwork

Reach broke #2 with armor abilities and bloom. Halo 4 broke all those things with loadouts, ordinance drops, removal (at least at launch) of map pickups, and JIP.

With reference to #1, they appear to have learned their lesson. However, #2 and #3, in my opinion, still look broken, which is basically the nail in the coffin for H5’s multiplayer long-term.

With reference to #2: “Spartan abilities” and sprint fundamentally and in-principle either worsen or break #2. 343i apparently thinks it’s more a matter of the implementation. I disagree, and I’m calling it now: you CANNOT put those things in a Halo game and expect it to do well. I don’t care if you call them “spartan abilities” instead of “armor abilities” and don’t make them loadout items: those things are just taking the same concept - PROVEN to not work in Halo - and tweaking the implementation. It boggles my mind how they think this is a good idea. Giving players too many varied movement abilities enables poor play to be rewarded (get away free!) and makes decision making - one of the MOST important things in CE/2/3 - a less important part of how you play. THE PROBLEM WITH SPRINT/AAs/ETC IS NOT IMPLEMENTATION, IT IS CONCEPT. Spartan abilities should not be in the game. Neither should sprint.

With reference to #3: I am concerned that the greatly increased speed of the game, due in no small part to the unlimited sprinting, CoD-AW inspired dodging, and Crysis-inspired groundslamming, will worsen or break #3. I’ll reserve judgment about this until playing, but if you speed the game up too much and add too many movement options and abilities, the game ceases to be about map-control based play revolving around teamwork. It instead turns into the frenetic chaos exemplified by, for example, Call of Duty. Halo’s default pace has always been a bit on the slow side (hence why MLG settings often had increased base move speed), but what they’ve shown so far for Halo 5 looks more like a descent into chaos than a correction for slightly slow default gameplay.

It really looks like the devs are just grabbing ideas from other shooters and shoehorning them into Halo, and just messing around with implementation until they get it “right”. And maybe I’m wrong and they can get something “right” from this, but I don’t think so. I think that borrowing elements from other shooters compromises the very core of what Halo multiplayer has always been about, and it surprise me that the devs seem intent on merely refining elements PROVEN to ruin Halo multiplayer, rather than just throwing them out altogether. When you grab-bag ideas from other popular shooters and throw them in yours, you get a soul-less game that is immediately recognizable as such, and in the super crowded genre of the FPS, that signals death of your game in the long run.

Halo is a relatively uncomplicated game in its mechanics (a good thing!), and fundamental conceptual changes to those mechanics (sprint/dodging/abilities) fundamentally change Halo and make it something else, regardless of how those things are implemented. Many of these things are proven not to work in Halo, and 343i needs to change course and get rid of them for Halo 5, or it will flop just like Halo 4.

TL; DR → Get rid of spartan abilities and sprint - these have been twice confirmed as failures for Halo. Get rid of dodging. Be incredibly careful with how you implement ADS. Don’t make the game so fast that it devolves into chaos.

See you in the beta! I hope 343i proves me wrong and Halo 5 turns out to be great, but right now it looks like they took the turd ideas of Halo 4 and are just reforming the game into a turd with a different shape.

Looking at the Halo 5 videos at first made me mad, but being without real Halo for 4 years kinda takes its toll on how much you can keep caring when it seems hopeless. Funny how Frankie said there were no AAs but what we got are Spartan Abilities. I guess he and the rest of 343i completely missed the point. How grown adults can’t add 1+1 is beyond me.

I will still play it in Dec with an open mind to see if I enjoy it since it might surprise me, but from what I saw I’m not going to get my hopes high.

> 2533274865508111;1:
> So the H5 footage couldn’t have been more disappointing to me as a longtime Halo player and fan, and I do not think that Halo 5 will be the shot in the arm the franchise needs in order to make new games as popular as old ones. If they get the issues fixed with the MCC, I believe the MCC will have the larger long-term player base.
>
> What I believe the developers think, from Reach/H4/H5 reveal:
> Halo needs to borrow elements from other shooters to “keep up”, “innovate”, and “stay relevant” (whatever those things may mean). Day 1 sales are the ultimate concern.

I stopped reading here - because YOU clearly don’t understand what the developers are thinking. Look at the Halo 5 launch trailer, look at how much they stress the term arena gameplay - 343i knows that Halo 4 didn’t maintain a playerbase and they are trying to change that.

Also, there’s a difference between borrowing elements from other shooters and using similar idea’s to other shooters. Yes, Halo does need to keep-up with other games, it does not exist in a vaccum and yes, that means using aspects of other games. Not all of them and the important part is the implementation, but the point remains that it cannot be some unique snowflake of a game, the market is too saturated for that to be possible. Mass appeal IS important, but so is longevity - both Reach and 4 lacked the latter as the multiplayer aspect wasn’t cohesive enough for players to stick with the game. Right now, movement is the key in fps, so Halo has to update it’s movement, which has been slowing since Halo CE, so that isn’t something recent. If it isn’t going to have a fast move speed, it has to give the player a way to move around the map quickly, which it looks like we’ll have now.

Also, for the above poster, AA’s and Spartan abilities have so little in common it actually physically hurts me that someone can claim to like Halo and still say that.

> 2533274802792899;3:
> > 2533274865508111;1:
> > So the H5 footage couldn’t have been more disappointing to me as a longtime Halo player and fan, and I do not think that Halo 5 will be the shot in the arm the franchise needs in order to make new games as popular as old ones. If they get the issues fixed with the MCC, I believe the MCC will have the larger long-term player base.
> >
> > What I believe the developers think, from Reach/H4/H5 reveal:
> > Halo needs to borrow elements from other shooters to “keep up”, “innovate”, and “stay relevant” (whatever those things may mean). Day 1 sales are the ultimate concern.
>
>
>
> I stopped reading here - because YOU clearly don’t understand what the developers are thinking. Look at the Halo 5 launch trailer, look at how much they stress the term arena gameplay - 343i knows that Halo 4 didn’t maintain a playerbase and they are trying to change that.
>
> Also, there’s a difference between borrowing elements from other shooters and using similar idea’s to other shooters. Yes, Halo does need to keep-up with other games, it does not exist in a vaccum and yes, that means using aspects of other games. Not all of them and the important part is the implementation, but the point remains that it cannot be some unique snowflake of a game, the market is too saturated for that to be possible. Mass appeal IS important, but so is longevity - both Reach and 4 lacked the latter as the multiplayer aspect wasn’t cohesive enough for players to stick with the game. Right now, movement is the key in fps, so Halo has to update it’s movement, which has been slowing since Halo CE, so that isn’t something recent. If it isn’t going to have a fast move speed, it has to give the player a way to move around the map quickly, which it looks like we’ll have now.
>
> Also, for the above poster, AA’s and Spartan abilities have so little in common it actually physically hurts me that someone can claim to like Halo and still say that.

#1) Read my post. It’s basically an argument for why Halo 5 doesn’t appear to be making good on 343i’s stated intentions. Talk is cheap. Look at what they do, not what they say.

#2) I disagree with both your points - that Halo needs to “keep up” by using aspects of other games, and that it cannot be some “unique snowflake” of a game. Halo CE/2/3 are quite unique - even Reach could be included there. Halo 4 borrowed elements and lost its uniqueness. I also disagree with your implicit point that without borrowing elements from other shooters, Halo would lose mass appeal. I’d argue EXACTLY the opposite: insofar as Halo has lost its uniqueness by borrowing from other games, it has lost mass appeal. Halo’s multiplayer - as of Halo 4 - no longer has mass appeal.

Halo should ONLY borrow elements from other shooters IF the core Halo gameplay will be enhanced. For the reasons I outlined in my post, I do not believe that movement options are the way to do that. If movement is to be updated, just update the base player move speed and adjust player acceleration accordingly. Movement abilities are a bad idea because they diminish the import of decision making in gameplay, and they can also worsen or break the base idea that Halo multiplayer is about map control.

#3) AAs and Spartan abilities are the same concept with different implementation. The concept is proven broken; implementation is irrelevant.

Halo hit it’s peak with halo 3. I keep hearing this “wrong way” crap. But no one stepping up with ways to add something new that would please them. If memory serves me well Halo 3 received flak for equipment in the first year of its life. Not sure if you can dig those old threads up anymore after Bnet changed it’s layout. Halo 2 literally had “halo2sucks.com” and an ever popular “halo 2 noobified” video.

Every game past CE has gotten flak. No matter what dev’s do someone will always be upset. Halo will never go back. If you don’t like the new direction play the MCC. If the gameplay is that great you should have no problem playing the exact same stuff for the years to come.

And as a note I hate saying “go back and play the older games.” But i’m tired of voicing the same thing over and over and over. It’s going to turn into people wanting just new maps guns and vehicles. Which at that point i’d be upset because it’s nothing new. Hell that’s why i quit cod forever ago until AW came along.

Every game past CE has gotten flak, but it wasn’t until Reach that the flak started to be reflected in the shrinking of the player base. You cannot invalidate criticism just by saying “there’s always criticism”; the content of the criticism is important, and lots of the criticism of 2/3 was either insignificant or invalid. My criticism of Halo 5 based on a couple gameplay videos is also insignificant (we don’t have the game in hand yet), but if you want to argue it as invalid, it requires argument to that effect :wink:

I don’t want them to re-release CE/2/3 with Halo 5 necessarily, but I wish that if they were to shake up fundamental things about the game, they would follow two simple guidelines:

  1. If a concept was already proven not to work in a previous game, it will not be used again
  2. No concept will be borrowed simply because it worked well in <insert popular FPS / game here>

I agree that the peak was Halo 3 for this series (yes, even with the lousy no-hitscan system and silly/bad BR spread). The series has come off that peak and is in a valley, and the devs are clearly trying to find the next peak. However, it seems to me that they want both to appease those who want the first peak back (CE/2/3) while also heading to a new mountain for a new generation of gamers. I don’t think they can have both. They either need to flip the bird to fans of CE/2/3 and say “go play the MCC” while they go reinvent the Halo wheel on their search for the next peak, or they need to give up aspirations of having Halo changing too much from what it was in the days of CE/2/3, and just stay there.

Halo 5: Guardians is looking simply amazing and I’m truly excited about the cool thematic Spartan abilities.

Smart Scope (ADS/Scoping): I think it’s a pretty neat integration of the traditional scope capability with regards to a more realistic look and feel; plus I think it’ll help attract some of the gamers who might spend their time with other FPSs. It’s important to not that the traditional ADS aspects have NOT been included such as reduced mobility when aiming down sight and flinch effects or altered weapon accuracy; therefore, “no big deal” should be most people’s take but of course it won’t. Many people will be outraged about this and say that Halo is now officially a Call of Duty clone (guaranteed to see multiple threads on this); especially, with sprint still being included. All I can say is – people sure can be stupid.

Stability (Slow Fall or Hovering): An interesting addition and one I’m genuinely excited about even though I don’t have a clear understanding of how the mechanic is triggered. I think it’s linked to the smart scope mechanic in that if you scope-in while airborne it halts and then stabilizes your momentum in the air followed by a slow decent down. Its main purpose will be for maintaining an altitude advantage when aiming and firing on opponents who try taking shelter behind low cover or that are trying to use certain map obstacles or distance to escape fire. It might also have the potential ability to cancel your momentum if you so needed to; although, I’m curious about a few things such as if your momentum will simply carry on as normal after releasing the mechanic (I highly doubt that’ll be the case) as well as if you can be shot out of this stabilized state given that de-scoping is returning (I assume yes) and does it drain your thruster pack’s energy or capabilities while you’re in that stabilized state (again, I assume yes). Anyways, the flip-side of this interesting mechanic is that you likely expose yourself in a easily targetable state to your opponents. Like I said, an interesting new mechanic.

Thruster: I’m really liking the method in how they’re incorporating the thruster pack into H5. It adds to the fast paced experience and overall upgraded mobility in H5; plus, given that everyone has the same mechanics from the get go it means that there’s really no obvious balance issues with regards to including it. The only things worth monitoring during the beta for balancing purposes will likely be in regards to how far a boost or thrust sends you and how quickly it recharges for reuse.

Sprint: I love it and can’t imagine Halo going back to the days without it (and to whom it may concern I’ve been playing Halo competitively since the original game’s release). I have absolutely no problem with sprint in Halo whatsoever. I have no problem with maps being a bit bigger to accommodate it. I have no problem with players having better methods to bail from engagements. I believe the outcry of sprint ruining map control as a fundamental part of Halo’s competitive arena based game-play is nothing more than superficial hating, whining, and b*tching by nostalgic fools. Map control in H5 will be just as important as it’s ever been regardless to sprint; though, sprint will make maps more difficult to lock-down and control, but that’s okay because Halo’s not a n00b friendly game. Halo has always been a difficult and challenging first person arena-based shooter and increasing the mobility through mechanics such as sprint and the thruster pack simply add to that aspect (btw, I’ll never understand the complaints orientated around the challenge of sprint being included; never). I do however absolutely love how 343i have tweaked it for H5 by ensuring that no shield recharging can take place while sprinting.

Charge: An ability that’s linked to the sprint mechanic as well as the melee mechanic that makes some thematic sense, but it’ll be interesting to see how this mechanic actually plays-out in-game. I initially assumed it would be a one-strike-kill-type of move against a fully shielded player if it outright connected directly with an opponent and I had some reservations about that but since then I’ve heard someone who’s had hands on experience say that it’ll completely drain an opponents’ shields if its a direct impact on a fully shielded opponent (not kill them outright). I still do wonder if there’s some sort of cool-down factor incorporated into it and more specifically if you missed with the bash attempt. I think having players stumble a few feet while trying to recover or if the bash were to strike a wall the player should take a second to shake off the shock of it before being able to do anything, but those are just my thoughts. Also, what could this mean about the strength of the basic melee?

Slide: Another ability that’s linked to the sprint mechanic but this time the crouch mechanic too; it also makes thematic sense and likely won’t create any real issues game-play wise. I do wonder what happens if you slide into an opponent and try to melee? Will there be awkward animations occurring? Also, I’m generally sure this mechanic could lead to some awkward animations if sliding over ledges and whatnot which could suck; hopefully, they’ll have it so that sliding over a ledge smoothly transitions your player back into a mobile stance position.

Ground Pound: An interesting mechanic addition (also linked to the crouch mechanic I believe), but one that’ll have to be watched carefully as to how powerful and balanced it is. In theory I have little concern with it outside of possibly eliminating the crouch jump mechanic, but with clambering incorporated now maybe the loss of crouch jumping won’t be such a big deal. Anyways, the only other aspect I could see being annoying is if the kill radius isn’t extremely tight with pretty much zero splash damage. I think for it to be a plausible and useful mechanic it should require a player to basically land on or within touching distance to whichever opponent(s) it was meant to attack/damage. Thus far it looks like that’s mostly the case, but I’m not 100% sure about the splash damage aspect. Not-to-mention, I believe there is a cool-down factor after striking the floor which should help balance it some given the risk/reward aspect that also leaves you vulnerable if you miss.

Clamber (Climbing): About damn time this mechanic (linked to the jump mechanic) was incorporated into Halo. If you really think about it, it makes little sense for Spartans to be unable to use their hands to grab and pull themselves up onto ledges or whatnot; therefore, this inclusion was an ideal or no-brainer addition to the game – just like sprint as well as the smart scope system too.

In the end these super-soldier Spartan abilities fit well into the game and universe’s theme while not appearing to detract from the basic arena game-play of controlling powerful weapons and locking down the map’s more powerful positions and best of all balanced starts! I only truly hope that 343i are smart enough to offer us customers the ability to fully customize the control scheme through button remapping so that we can truly enjoy the game.

> 2775209234672000;7:
> In the end these super-soldier Spartan abilities fit well into the game and universe’s theme while not appearing to detract from the basic arena game-play of controlling powerful weapons and locking down the map’s more powerful positions and best of all balanced starts!

Hope you’re right. Maybe 3rd time is the charm for these things. But to date, the evidence is to the contrary. I’m not sure that thematic consistency will translate to good gameplay.

I’d love to be sitting here in December 2016 and seeing Halo 5’s player base still in-tact, but I won’t believe I’m wrong about armor/spartan abilities and movement options until a Halo game that includes those things is able to somewhat sustain its player base for at least a year.

I don’t buy that the Spartans Abilities will reduce strategic thinking or decision making. Obviously I don’t know for certain how everything will play out, but from where I see there are risks/rewards for the abilities. I can sprint to disengage a fight or move quickly across the map, but if I get shot my shields won’t recharge and I’ll be at a disadvantage if I come across another enemy. Same thing happened plenty of times in previous Halo games, ie the escaping a fight and finding another enemy while I was weak. Ground Pound may be a devestating attack, but it is something you have to build up to, hover in the air and aim. That powerful attacks leaves you extremely vulnerable.

How exactly things will turn out, I won’t know until I try the beta. However, I see a level-playing field between players and, for now, it looks like it is going to come down to who uses their skills the best.

> 2533274865508111;6:
> Every game past CE has gotten flak, but it wasn’t until Reach that the flak started to be reflected in the shrinking of the player base. You cannot invalidate criticism just by saying “there’s always criticism”; the content of the criticism is important, and lots of the criticism of 2/3 was either insignificant or invalid. My criticism of Halo 5 based on a couple gameplay videos is also insignificant (we don’t have the game in hand yet), but if you want to argue it as invalid, it requires argument to that effect :wink:
>
> I don’t want them to re-release CE/2/3 with Halo 5 necessarily, but I wish that if they were to shake up fundamental things about the game, they would follow two simple guidelines:
> 1) If a concept was already proven not to work in a previous game, it will not be used again
> 2) No concept will be borrowed simply because it worked well in <insert popular FPS / game here>
>
> I agree that the peak was Halo 3 for this series (yes, even with the lousy no-hitscan system and silly/bad BR spread). The series has come off that peak and is in a valley, and the devs are clearly trying to find the next peak. However, it seems to me that they want both to appease those who want the first peak back (CE/2/3) while also heading to a new mountain for a new generation of gamers. I don’t think they can have both. They either need to flip the bird to fans of CE/2/3 and say “go play the MCC” while they go reinvent the Halo wheel on their search for the next peak, or they need to give up aspirations of having Halo changing too much from what it was in the days of CE/2/3, and just stay there.

My whole point was not to invalidate complaints. Merely that your supposed “golden games” got huge amounts of negative comments for the small additions they added. So people complaining about new additions is neither new nor should be weighted so heavily. Yeah no. How a concept is implamented is very important. Just because it didn’t work one way doesn’t mean it needs to be chunked.

For example AA’s. The main issue they brought up was not everyone had the same ability at the same time. Causing certain “unfairness” in situations that couldn’t be helped. Some of it also was how powerful they were. Thats why from reach to 4 the AA’s got weaker. And that’s why in halo 5 we got even weaker ones AND everyone has the abilities and can be used at any time by anyone.

Your second guide line is impossible to tell because we are not the devs. Yes you can argue that the smart scope was added for new players. However I know a few people that will be happy that you can “scope” with an AR now. Halo has a big emphasis on movement both in and out of combat. So it’s actually rather natural to further add to movement. Like i said. Just because you can argue that side doesn’t mean that’s the reality of the situation or the only reason.

Getting the developers attention is really easy if enough members cancel their game preorders. All developers seem to be looking for are the first day sales numbers, and if they start taking a hit on those numbers, then they will have no choice but to listen and adapt. It’s sad how far game and launch day quality has slid in the last few years, as it seems every game has failed miserable to deliver on launch day.

So after the extremely flawed launches of Destiny and now MCC, I don’t care what any developer offers for a pre-order bonus. They are not getting any pre-orders from me. They will have to count themselves luck to get even a day 1 purchase, as it seems to take at least a week or so after launch to get a fully functioning product you paid for.

Your preorder is the only vote you get, so use it wisely, and stop drinking the marketing Kool Aide!

> 2533274865508111;8:
> > 2775209234672000;7:
> > In the end these super-soldier Spartan abilities fit well into the game and universe’s theme while not appearing to detract from the basic arena game-play of controlling powerful weapons and locking down the map’s more powerful positions and best of all balanced starts!
>
>
> Hope you’re right. Maybe 3rd time is the charm for these things. But to date, the evidence is to the contrary. I’m not sure that thematic consistency will translate to good gameplay.
>
> I’d love to be sitting here in December 2016 and seeing Halo 5’s player base still in-tact, but I won’t believe I’m wrong about armor/spartan abilities and movement options until a Halo game can that includes those things is able to somewhat sustain its player base for at least a year.

It’s wildly unfair to equivocally compare past Halo games with newer ones because to do so is to wholly reject our forever changing culture as well as the obvious technological advancements and methodological progressions in the gaming business let alone the Halo franchise. Not to mention, it’s a total failure in understanding or grasping the growing scope of the gaming industry as well as our gaming culture.

In today’s gaming culture there’s a lot more quality competition for a gamer’s time and it’s something all game designers have to deal with. It’s quite difficult to create an experience that’s new and refreshing that’ll captivate a majority of the gaming culture and maintain a hold on them for a extended period of time; especially, for an existing franchise therefore companies like 343i try to move their franchises forward within what are generally considered the normal progressions and advancements in their specific gaming genres while still maintaining a flavor of what made their games successful in the past with hopes of including some new innovative addition that might allure new players or help the game maintain a longer lasting hold on it’s population base. Mistakes will often be made in deciding what compromises and directions should be followed, but ultimately it falls down to the customer base to be accepting of the inherent changes (good or bad) or the community’s online experience will indeed fail. A dwindling population count will directly lead to a lesser online experience. Obviously, some mistakes will dramatically decrease the probability for success to occur so it’s important to give as much feedback as possible to the designers of the game in order to provide corrections for future decisions, but all to often that feedback is useless because it lacks a proper perspective or it’s nothing more than emotionally driven condescending and hateful remarks (just take a look at the majority of posts here at Waypoint).

Going forward the developers and its community need to realize that the beloved Halo IP faces a much bigger pool of quality gaming experiences plus direct threats from other juggernauts in the FPS genre - the CoD franchise, the Battlefield franchise, a likely Titanfall franchise, the Borderland franchise (even though it fits a slightly different genre of FPS), a likely Destiny franchise (more akin to Borderlands’ type of FPS), and even to a lesser extend the Far Cry, Crysis, and L4D franchises plus who knows what else the future holds. I honestly don’t believe there’s any way that the Halo franchise can get back to the dominance it once held on the overall gaming population, but if the fanatic Halo community becomes more open-minded and willing to accept changes in the franchise’s need to move forward then it can carve out a nice sustainable chuck of population for extended play purposes and that’s what we should all be asking for; well, that and a good enjoyable game to play of course, but that tag is likely to be governed by what’s sure to be a wide variety of perceptions – mine is excited about Halo 5: Guardians.

> 2775209234672000;12:
> Going forward the developers and its community need to realize that the beloved Halo IP faces a much bigger pool of quality gaming experiences plus direct threats from other juggernauts in the FPS genre - the CoD franchise, the Battlefield franchise, a likely Titanfall franchise, the Borderland franchise (even though it fits a slightly different genre of FPS), a likely Destiny franchise (more akin to Borderlands’ type of FPS), and even to a lesser extend the Far Cry, Crysis, and L4D franchises plus who knows what else the future holds. I honestly don’t believe there’s any way that the Halo franchise can get back to the dominance it once held on the overall gaming population, but if the fanatic Halo community becomes more open-minded and willing to accept changes in the franchise’s need to move forward then it can carve out a nice sustainable chuck of population for extended play purposes and that’s what we should all be asking for; well, that and a good enjoyable game to play of course, but that tag is likely to be governed by what’s sure to be a wide variety of perceptions – mine is excited about Halo 5: Guardians.

This is more or less why I get so concerned when I see the developers still - in my opinion - engaged in this mix of reusing concepts that didn’t work and borrowing other concepts from Call of Duty/Crysis/etc.

As you point out - FPS market is incredibly crowded. Only games with a very well defined identity survive more than a couple months in the online space. The games that DO have a well defined identity survive for a long time and make tons of $$$. I worry that the devs either don’t know what Halo’s multiplayer identity is, or they simply are not content with it.

Also, here is some proof that you DON’T have to fundamentally change your game in order to build a new player base:
http://steamcharts.com/app/730#All

I would argue that we have not seen ANY FPS franchise - except possibly Team Fortress 2 - make significant core changes to its series and see an increased playerbase as a result. If Halo pulls it off, it will be the first.

For what it’s worth, I agree that Halo will never be back to the dominance it once had. I do think it could return to being as popular as other top tier shooters (CoD/Battlefield). I believe there’s a market for Halo; there is nothing else really trying to fill the competitive team-based arena shooter on console. I just hope Halo 5 is actually that kind of game; the gameplay videos leave me unconvinced.

> 2775209234672000;7:
> > 2533274865508111;1:
> > TL; DR → Get rid of spartan abilities and sprint - these have been twice confirmed as failures for Halo. Get rid of dodging. Be incredibly careful with how you implement ADS. Don’t make the game so fast that it devolves into chaos.
> >
> > See you in the beta! I hope 343i proves me wrong and Halo 5 turns out to be great, but right now it looks like they took the turd ideas of Halo 4 and are just reforming the game into a turd with a different shape.
>
>
>
>
> Clamber (Climbing): About damn time this mechanic (linked to the jump mechanic) was incorporated into Halo. If you really think about it, it makes little sense for Spartans to be unable to use their hands to grab and pull themselves up onto ledges or whatnot; therefore, this inclusion was an ideal or no-brainer addition to the game – just like sprint as well as the smart scope system too.
>
> In the end these super-soldier Spartan abilities fit well into the game and universe’s theme while not appearing to detract from the basic arena game-play of controlling powerful weapons and locking down the map’s more powerful positions and best of all balanced starts!

Clamber will ruin Halo. The others are okay (not desirable but okay). Clamber is a huge step in the wrong direction. It not only eliminates skill jumps but also leads to things like ‘press X to take cover’. Halo makes it’s money on the free movements. Any interaction with objects will destroy that.

I’m willing to play the beta with an open mind. They got rid of loadouts, ordinance, invisibility, jetpack and flinch. 343 has also taken steps to make sprint as useless as possible in most situations. All this complaining when we can play it in a month and a half seems pointless. It’s the most Halo looking multiplayer game since 2007.

> 2533274804898926;14:
> Clamber is a huge step in the wrong direction. It not only eliminates skill jumps but also leads to things like ‘press X to take cover’.

Not sure how you were able to make that conclusion.
Propping up from ledges and Active cover seem like two things that aren’t that interrelated.

Also, you do realise you can take cover by crouching, yes? Hypothetically, how would active cover be any different than this, other than animations?

> 2533274865508111;4:
> > 2533274802792899;3:
> > > 2533274865508111;1:
> > > So the H5 footage couldn’t have been more disappointing to me as a longtime Halo player and fan, and I do not think that Halo 5 will be the shot in the arm the franchise needs in order to make new games as popular as old ones. If they get the issues fixed with the MCC, I believe the MCC will have the larger long-term player base.
> > >
> > > What I believe the developers think, from Reach/H4/H5 reveal:
> > > Halo needs to borrow elements from other shooters to “keep up”, “innovate”, and “stay relevant” (whatever those things may mean). Day 1 sales are the ultimate concern.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I stopped reading here - because YOU clearly don’t understand what the developers are thinking. Look at the Halo 5 launch trailer, look at how much they stress the term arena gameplay - 343i knows that Halo 4 didn’t maintain a playerbase and they are trying to change that.
> >
> > Also, there’s a difference between borrowing elements from other shooters and using similar idea’s to other shooters. Yes, Halo does need to keep-up with other games, it does not exist in a vaccum and yes, that means using aspects of other games. Not all of them and the important part is the implementation, but the point remains that it cannot be some unique snowflake of a game, the market is too saturated for that to be possible. Mass appeal IS important, but so is longevity - both Reach and 4 lacked the latter as the multiplayer aspect wasn’t cohesive enough for players to stick with the game. Right now, movement is the key in fps, so Halo has to update it’s movement, which has been slowing since Halo CE, so that isn’t something recent. If it isn’t going to have a fast move speed, it has to give the player a way to move around the map quickly, which it looks like we’ll have now.
> >
> > Also, for the above poster, AA’s and Spartan abilities have so little in common it actually physically hurts me that someone can claim to like Halo and still say that.
>
>
> #1) Read my post. It’s basically an argument for why Halo 5 doesn’t appear to be making good on 343i’s stated intentions. Talk is cheap. Look at what they do, not what they say.
>
> #2) I disagree with both your points - that Halo needs to “keep up” by using aspects of other games, and that it cannot be some “unique snowflake” of a game. Halo CE/2/3 are quite unique - even Reach could be included there. Halo 4 borrowed elements and lost its uniqueness. I also disagree with your implicit point that without borrowing elements from other shooters, Halo would lose mass appeal. I’d argue EXACTLY the opposite: insofar as Halo has lost its uniqueness by borrowing from other games, it has lost mass appeal. Halo’s multiplayer - as of Halo 4 - no longer has mass appeal.
>
> Halo should ONLY borrow elements from other shooters IF the core Halo gameplay will be enhanced. For the reasons I outlined in my post, I do not believe that movement options are the way to do that. If movement is to be updated, just update the base player move speed and adjust player acceleration accordingly. Movement abilities are a bad idea because they diminish the import of decision making in gameplay, and they can also worsen or break the base idea that Halo multiplayer is about map control.
>
> #3) AAs and Spartan abilities are the same concept with different implementation. The concept is proven broken; implementation is irrelevant.

I don’t need to read your post, you’ve already come into this ‘discussion’ with your mind set on ignoring what they have both shown and talked about. So, I feel no remorse in doing the same thing to you and will simply rebut your points.

Halo 2 and 3 are not unique…they are continuations of Halo using elements which were present in other games, dual wielding was in games before halo 2, equipment was in games before Halo 3. That is what game development is and always have been, creating the original game and having THAT be unique, then building off that with other ideas - not all of which original.

The base movement won’t be updated though, it’s pointless trying to argue that so there’s no point in trying. Besides having everyone jog about at lighting pace or bunnyhop around the map has always looked ridiculous, regardless of the skill involved. Movement abilities are not a bad idea and do none of the things you’ve said - your point is nonsense. ALL fps are about map control, just varing degrees of it - just and in card games(magic, Hearthstone, etc.) all of them are about board control in some way. dicision making is by now way impacted by these new abilities, 8 times out of 10 if you jump into a bad situation, sprinting or boosting out will not save you. You’ve ruined your shields and are about to be popped by the guy chasing you or the next guy you run into.
Besides you have always been able to simply…walk back around the corner until your shields recharge, as with and regenerating health system.
No, they are not. At all. In any way, there is so little overlap it hurts to make this point. EQUIPMENT and AA’s are more similar, the former being far more balanced. ‘Spartan abilities’ are something everyone has the same amount of and can use at any time, everyone has the same risk/reward associated with using them. Everyone is on one playing field, that is the essence of Arena gameplay and THAT is what unbalanced Reach and 4. Spartan abilities are movement options - that’s all.

You should re-name this thread to “Haters don’t get it: Judging a game’s mechanics before even trying the beta”

I watched the movie “lets be cops” last night. The scenes where the one character is at his day job at a game dev studio reminded me so much of my vision of how 343 works.

> 2533274802792899;3:
> > 2533274865508111;1:
> > So the H5 footage couldn’t have been more disappointing to me as a longtime Halo player and fan, and I do not think that Halo 5 will be the shot in the arm the franchise needs in order to make new games as popular as old ones. If they get the issues fixed with the MCC, I believe the MCC will have the larger long-term player base.
> >
> > What I believe the developers think, from Reach/H4/H5 reveal:
> > Halo needs to borrow elements from other shooters to “keep up”, “innovate”, and “stay relevant” (whatever those things may mean). Day 1 sales are the ultimate concern.
>
>
> I stopped reading here - because YOU clearly don’t understand what the developers are thinking. Look at the Halo 5 launch trailer, look at how much they stress the term arena gameplay - 343i knows that Halo 4 didn’t maintain a playerbase and they are trying to change that.
>
> Also, there’s a difference between borrowing elements from other shooters and using similar idea’s to other shooters. Yes, Halo does need to keep-up with other games, it does not exist in a vaccum and yes, that means using aspects of other games. Not all of them and the important part is the implementation, but the point remains that it cannot be some unique snowflake of a game, the market is too saturated for that to be possible. Mass appeal IS important, but so is longevity - both Reach and 4 lacked the latter as the multiplayer aspect wasn’t cohesive enough for players to stick with the game. Right now, movement is the key in fps, so Halo has to update it’s movement, which has been slowing since Halo CE, so that isn’t something recent. If it isn’t going to have a fast move speed, it has to give the player a way to move around the map quickly, which it looks like we’ll have now.
>
> Also, for the above poster, AA’s and Spartan abilities have so little in common it actually physically hurts me that someone can claim to like Halo and still say that.

The market is over saturated so your strategy is to be similar to everything else? How does that make any sense?