"Fast" Gameplay

Games Other Halo
1

I’ve seen so many posts claiming Halo 4 needs to be “faster” than Reach. While I agree that it does need to be faster, it seems only a few of us here really understand what fast gameplay is. I hope this thread will clear this confusion up.

Fast gameplay isn’t about moving fast or having quick kill times. It’s about what goes on in engagements and how often engagements occur. One without the other leads to “slow” gameplay.

Halo naturally has very active engagements. Players can be shooting, punching, throwing grenades, jumping, crouching, and simply traversing the map at roughly the same time. This forces good players to multitask and thus leads to “faster” gameplay.

Maps are what make engagements occur often. While mechanics do play a vital role here, map design MUST be good for “fast” gameplay. Maps have to have easy access to any vital areas, while still having enough cover to let players recover from engagements. Maps must be complex enough that players can create unique strafes, while not limiting lines of sight.

Now I’d like to talk about some more controversial topics. Namely, I’d like to talk about sprint. While this is commonly thought to speed up gameplay, I feel it really ends up slowing down gameplay. First of all, it minimizes engagements. Players using sprint to traverse the map no longer engage in small battles. With how sprint currently works, we also lost great map design. In order to embrace sprint, maps had to be larger, they had to incorporate longer lines of sight, and they had to flat. Map variety in general took a loss, as sprint had a specific formula needed to work.

I’d also like to talk about bloom. When I say bloom slows down gameplay, I don’t mean simply because it slows down kill times- although the in combat waiting certainly didn’t help. The big thing is multitasking. The best way to win a DMR fight is to crouch, as that minimizes bloom. When crouching, players no longer strafe- in fact, they no longer really do anything other than shoot.

I guess that’s it for now. Feel free to add or criticize anything here.

2

Really? Nothing?

3

Go back to the trilogy gameplay and halo will! be great once again!

4

this is why I love TU in Reach. its fast and always fun.

but dont worry, if Halo 4 is anything like 2/3 (which it will be kinda), it will be fast

5

> I’ve seen so many posts claiming Halo 4 needs to be “faster” than Reach. While I agree that it does need to be faster, it seems only a few of us here really understand what fast gameplay is. I hope this thread will clear this confusion up.
>
> Fast gameplay isn’t about moving fast or having quick kill times. It’s about what goes on in engagements and how often engagements occur. One without the other leads to “slow” gameplay. No, when I am talking about moving fast, I literally mean I want to move fast. Halo isn’t a tactical game. It’s closer to a twitch shooter like old school arena shooter games. I want to be able to move fast from point A to point B.
>
> Halo naturally has very active engagements. Players can be shooting, punching, throwing grenades, jumping, crouching, and simply traversing the map at roughly the same time. This forces good players to multitask and thus leads to “faster” gameplay.ya, no. active battles is not the same thing as moving fast. Multitasking is not the same thing as faster gameplay.
>
> Maps are what make engagements occur often. While mechanics do play a vital role here, map design MUST be good for “fast” gameplay. Maps have to have easy access to any vital areas, while still having enough cover to let players recover from engagements. Maps must be complex enough that players can create unique strafes, while not limiting lines of sight.Any map that has existed in the Halo series will work just fine with sprint
>
> Now I’d like to talk about some more controversial topics. Namely, I’d like to talk about sprint. While this is commonly thought to speed up gameplay, I feel it really ends up slowing down gameplay. First of all, it minimizes engagements. Players using sprint to traverse the map no longer engage in small battles. With how sprint currently works, we also lost great map design. In order to embrace sprint, maps had to be larger, they had to incorporate longer lines of sight, and they had to flat. Map variety in general took a loss, as sprint had a specific formula needed to work. I can argue the exact opposite. Sprint will maximize the number of engagements because there will be little downtime between spawning at your spawn and returning to action when there are no vehicles available. Like I said, the maps should not change. the only difference is you will be able to get from point a to point b faster. Sprint can work on any kind of map…it’s not tied to a specific type of map.
>
> I’d also like to talk about bloom. When I say bloom slows down gameplay, I don’t mean simply because it slows down kill times- although the in combat waiting certainly didn’t help. The big thing is multitasking. The best way to win a DMR fight is to crouch, as that minimizes bloom. When crouching, players no longer strafe- in fact, they no longer really do anything other than shoot.
>
> I guess that’s it for now. Feel free to add or criticize anything here.

6

I always prefer “intense” gameplay rather than fast.

COD is really fast, but I don’t enjoy it because it feels like a brain dead spraying fest.

However, it has it’s own intense moments, not including running around with your head cut off with G18s, but a good old firefight.

This occurs a lot more in Halo and BF3, which is why I enjoy them more.

7

> Now I’d like to talk about some more controversial topics. Namely, I’d like to talk about sprint. While this is commonly thought to speed up gameplay, I feel it really ends up slowing down gameplay. First of all, it minimizes engagements. Players using sprint to traverse the map no longer engage in small battles. With how sprint currently works, we also lost great map design. In order to embrace sprint, maps had to be larger, they had to incorporate longer lines of sight, and they had to flat. Map variety in general took a loss, as sprint had a specific formula needed to work.
>
> I’d also like to talk about bloom. When I say bloom slows down gameplay, I don’t mean simply because it slows down kill times- although the in combat waiting certainly didn’t help. The big thing is multitasking. The best way to win a DMR fight is to crouch, as that minimizes bloom. When crouching, players no longer strafe- in fact, they no longer really do anything other than shoot.
>
> I guess that’s it for now. Feel free to add or criticize anything here.

very good points!

I’ll never look at Bloom the same way again.

8

Great post. Sprint is a cool idea but as you said, it slows the game down. Along with the points you made it also allows people to run from battles.

9

> > I’ve seen so many posts claiming Halo 4 needs to be “faster” than Reach. While I agree that it does need to be faster, it seems only a few of us here really understand what fast gameplay is. I hope this thread will clear this confusion up.
> >
> > Fast gameplay isn’t about moving fast or having quick kill times. It’s about what goes on in engagements and how often engagements occur. One without the other leads to “slow” gameplay. No, when I am talking about moving fast, I literally mean I want to move fast. Halo isn’t a tactical game. It’s closer to a twitch shooter like old school arena shooter games. I want to be able to move fast from point A to point B.
> >
> > Halo naturally has very active engagements. Players can be shooting, punching, throwing grenades, jumping, crouching, and simply traversing the map at roughly the same time. This forces good players to multitask and thus leads to “faster” gameplay.ya, no. active battles is not the same thing as moving fast. Multitasking is not the same thing as faster gameplay.
> >
> > Maps are what make engagements occur often. While mechanics do play a vital role here, map design MUST be good for “fast” gameplay. Maps have to have easy access to any vital areas, while still having enough cover to let players recover from engagements. Maps must be complex enough that players can create unique strafes, while not limiting lines of sight.Any map that has existed in the Halo series will work just fine with sprint
> >
> > Now I’d like to talk about some more controversial topics. Namely, I’d like to talk about sprint. While this is commonly thought to speed up gameplay, I feel it really ends up slowing down gameplay. First of all, it minimizes engagements. Players using sprint to traverse the map no longer engage in small battles. With how sprint currently works, we also lost great map design. In order to embrace sprint, maps had to be larger, they had to incorporate longer lines of sight, and they had to flat. Map variety in general took a loss, as sprint had a specific formula needed to work. I can argue the exact opposite. Sprint will maximize the number of engagements because there will be little downtime between spawning at your spawn and returning to action when there are no vehicles available. Like I said, the maps should not change. the only difference is you will be able to get from point a to point b faster. Sprint can work on any kind of map…it’s not tied to a specific type of map.
> >
> > I’d also like to talk about bloom. When I say bloom slows down gameplay, I don’t mean simply because it slows down kill times- although the in combat waiting certainly didn’t help. The big thing is multitasking. The best way to win a DMR fight is to crouch, as that minimizes bloom. When crouching, players no longer strafe- in fact, they no longer really do anything other than shoot.
> >
> > I guess that’s it for now. Feel free to add or criticize anything here.

1)Halo and Gears of War are considered the two most tactical games in modern gaming and hence why both are held in higher regard than CoD in the MLG Community (though this is beginning to change with Reach and GoW3 not quite living up to previous standards) despite generally being out-sold and having smaller online populus.

2)No, multitasking does not necessarily cause faster gameplay, but the ability to multi-task generally allows for more effective map and weapon control which in turn allows for if not faster gameplay, certainly more tactical.
No sprint can’t work on an map! Imagine having sprint on Guardian or The Pit in Halo 3 or Midship in Halo 2! I would completely destroy their map design.

3)As the OP said before, and personally I agree, that sprint slows gameplay down significantly. I find games much more exciting and quicker without sprint or bloom.

10

Wow, guys, thanks for the support. I’m pretty surprised how well this turned out.

11

I agree with everything you posted 100%. Damn.

If you go from playing Halo 3 for awhile to playing Reach this is probably the biggest difference when the gameplay experiences are compared. Things are a lot more fast-paced in Halo 3 and when you come back into Reach its hard to believe that the gameplay is THIS slow.

The maps are so far apart that even with sprint it takes a long time to get across them and find the enemy. Its more annoying than it is angering. I just wish the gameplay could mimic the ways of Halo 3 in its fast-paced glory.

12

Moving faster and quicker time-to-kill will naturally lead to faster paced game play…

Imo the key to a successful multiplayer FPS requires a solid foundation for the fundamental point-and-shoot game play.
Reduce auto-aim / aim-magnetism
smaller true-to-image hitboxes
wider field of view
60 frames/s frame rate
aiming reticle placed in middle of screen

Everyone blames high level game concepts, like armor abilities or bloom, for Reach’s failure. But Reach is not fun because the basics of pointing-and-shooting is not an enjoyable and rewarding experience. Too much auto aim, big hitboxes, choppy 30 frames/s, sub par fov, aiming reticle placed below center. Its awkward aiming and it feels like a rock paper scissors match. Not fun.

13

> I agree with everything you posted 100%. Damn.
>
>
> If you go from playing Halo 3 for awhile to playing Reach this is probably the biggest difference when the gameplay experiences are compared. Things are a lot more fast-paced in Halo 3 and when you come back into Reach its hard to believe that the gameplay is THIS slow.
>
> The maps are so far apart that even with sprint it takes a long time to get across them and find the enemy. Its more annoying than it is angering. I just wish the gameplay could mimic the ways of Halo 3 in its fast-paced glory.

Couldn’t agree with you more.

Well… I guess I could. As a great forger, I’ve tried over and over to make a map that plays well and works with AA’s. I’m yet to get anything that feels as great as the better Halo 3 maps. It really feels like the basic mechanics, not the actual maps, are the problem.

14

Halo 4 needs to be faster than Halo 3 but no faster than CE.

15

> Moving faster and quicker time-to-kill will naturally lead to faster paced game play…
>
> Imo the key to a successful multiplayer FPS requires a solid foundation for the fundamental point-and-shoot game play.
> Reduce auto-aim / aim-magnetism
> smaller true-to-image hitboxes
> wider field of view
> 60 frames/s frame rate
> aiming reticle placed in middle of screen
>
>
> Everyone blames high level game concepts, like armor abilities or bloom, for Reach’s failure. But Reach is not fun because the basics of pointing-and-shooting is not an enjoyable and rewarding experience. Too much auto aim, big hitboxes, choppy 30 frames/s, sub par fov, aiming reticle placed below center. Its awkward aiming and it feels like a rock paper scissors match. Not fun.

Yes, alot of people would want this to happen, but some things just aren’t possible on the 360 anymore, such as 60 fps. Yes, COD does run 60fps but that is in part of it using an older engine than the Reach engine (which is what Halo 4 is going to run on, although modified) so 30fps will have to do until a next-gen xbox comes out (remember the 360 is a 7 year old piece of hardware, not a PC, and Reach already pushes it into the breaking point)

The whole “point and shoot” thing is just giving me chills. I wouldn’t want Halo to become some idotic 3-5sk fest like COD is

The hitboxes in Halo are fine. Bullet magnetism and bloom are the problems here. Bloom (if it were to be in Halo 4, I hope not as i preferred bullet spread) would need to be toned down (85%, TU Bloom) along with bullet magnetism. Also, the field of view is fine along with the fact that the reticule is already at the middle of the screen