One thing that MLG does much better than Bungie ever did was placing items on the map. From spawn points to crates to power weapons MLG understand what creates good map movement from players and a good overall flow to the game. Weapon and item placement can have a massive impact on the flow of the game, and it is very important in multiplayer.
EDIT: This doesn’t mean that every map will be empty like it is in MLG, there could be rules in place by 343 to make sure MLG has all the weapons 343 wants on the map. The only thing I want MLG to do is make all the item placement balanced and carefully thought through in terms of map flow. This is something MLG does really well.
EDIT2: A lot of you are bringing up social and how MLG shouldn’t have an influence on that, and that is fine. 343 can do anything they want with social, but MLG should have control for all of the ranked section if there is one. It is very important to have good item placement for games between two highly skilled teams, and MLG does it best.
I have some perfect examples that I will add to this thread as I feel like it. For now lets take a look at Construct.
> Construct
> This is a very vertical map. There are 3 layers, with limited paths to the top layer. The top layer is also the better position on the map and is where most teams set up. This creates a ton of action on the top layer. Typically the bottom layer is used for nothing but spawning and deciding how you want to get to the top. This makes almost 2/3’s of Bungies map unused. MLG fixed that, somewhat. They created huge incentive to push to the bottom of the map. I will try to explain how they did this.
>
> On the default version there is one weapon, the spartan laser, on the bottom layer of the map. It is not very effective for a map like construct, especially compared to other weapons like the sniper or rockets. What MLG did was place 2 items on the bottom of the map, the sniper and an active camouflage that lasts for 1 minute. These 2 items make any player want to go to the bottom of the map, especially camo. Camo lasts for an entire minute, and is especially useful on Construct because there are limited paths you can take to get to the top. A good team can watch every single path to the top, so camo is very good at breaking a set up.
>
> One of the most frustrating aspects to Construct is constantly being spawned on the bottom of the map, having to fight your way up to the top with nothing to help you because everything that is useful is up top. It just goes to show MLG’s genius when it comes to placement. Simply putting 2 items on the map in a specific spot had a huge positive impact on the map Construct.
It is my opinion that MLG should have full control over item placement on all maps in Halo 4.
What you dont understand is that bungie only gets one shot at placement. MLG gets to play the maps hundreds of times and tweak the map as they see fit along the way, bungie doesnt get to do that before they released each halo game
Sure they tested the maps out but MLG has a massive advantage in being able to play the maps CONSTANTLY after the game is released to decide where they put the items.
343 isnt going to let MLG play the game constantly before its released.
Not gonna happen. MLG only considers balance and competitiveness when placing items. 343i have to consider visibility and accessibility for more casual players.
> Not gonna happen. MLG only considers balance and competitiveness when placing items. 343i have to consider visibility and accessibility for more casual players.
Exactly. It’s not always about the competitive aspect of the game.
> What you dont understand is that bungie only gets one shot at placement. MLG gets to play the maps hundreds of times and tweak the map as they see fit along the way, bungie doesnt get to do that before they released each halo game
>
> Sure they tested the maps out but MLG has a massive advantage in being able to play the maps CONSTANTLY after the game is released to decide where they put the items.
>
> 343 isnt going to let MLG play the game constantly before its released.
Bungie got many more than 1 shot at item placement. I am positive that they tweaked their placement dozens if not hundreds of times. Bungie also had a multiplayer beta in Halo 3 that gave them tons of data, and millions of games to use for item placement. Bungie had far more resources at their disposal than MLG.
MLG’s advantage comes from their intimate knowledge of high level gameplay.
And why not let MLG play the game constantly before release? The only thing it can do is help.
> > Not gonna happen. MLG only considers balance and competitiveness when placing items. 343i have to consider visibility and accessibility for more casual players.
>
> Exactly. It’s not always about the competitive aspect of the game.
Until one of you can explain to me how balanced item placement affects visibility or accessibility (this one really doesn’t make sense since balance goes hand in hand with equal accessibility), I don’t think MLG’s approach will have any detrimental affect on the casual player.
A lot of people seem to forget that this game is for EVERYONE, not just MLG.
I think Halo would be better off without MLG if you ask me. They are an overrated group of gamers who try to exploit games to make money on their skill.
Halo should not cater to MLG, MLG should cater to Halo. MLG should be on their knees thanking Bungie and soon to be 343i for making and continuing the Halo series for them to use and have in MLG related events.
MLG will just have to adapt to Halo 4 or not use it, I really don’t care. I am sick of all this “lets make Halo 4 MLG, hurr durr”. NO, NO, NO!!!
> A lot of people seem to forget that this game is for EVERYONE, not just MLG.
Balanced weapon placement helps everyone…
How wouldn’t it?
In reach there are at least 4 maps that simply give power weapons to one team or the other because Bungie failed to make balanced weapon placement.
I knew there would be some blind hate of MLG.
Competitive and casual design are squares and rectangles, respectively. A competitive game can be casual(Halo 2), while a casual game cannot be competitive(pre-patch Reach).
What happens to all the weapons MLG doesn’t like? We’d never see them in matchmaking.
> Halo should not cater to MLG, MLG should cater to Halo. MLG should be on their knees thanking Bungie and soon to be 343i for making and continuing the Halo series for them to use and have in MLG related events.
Oh, dude they’ve been about to drop Reach off the circuit because of unpopular and broken it is respectively was.
> What happens to all the weapons MLG doesn’t like? We’d never see them in matchmaking.
There could be rules set in place by 343 to prevent such things from happening.
Even with rules there would still be a bias for weapon placement.
MLG has the tools to make a gametype & map to their liking within the limits of the game, which are pretty large limits. They need to quit complaining and adapt or leave. Halo is not MLG. Halo is made to cater to both competitive and casual gamers in it’s own unique way.
> What happens to all the weapons MLG doesn’t like? We’d never see them in matchmaking.
Probably for the best.
343 should probably just let MLG make all of Halo 4
/sarcasm
> Even with rules there would still be a bias for weapon placement.
Bias towards weapons that are actually useful.
Is that bad?
> > Halo should not cater to MLG, MLG should cater to Halo. MLG should be on their knees thanking Bungie and soon to be 343i for making and continuing the Halo series for them to use and have in MLG related events.
>
> Oh, dude they’ve been about to drop Reach off the circuit because of unpopular and broken it is respectively was.
I don’t understand why MLG isn’t dropping Halo. They are losing viewers because Reach is boring to watch, and the halls aren’t even half full. The only reason I can think of that why they don’t drop it is because Halo is one of the first game they started with. They have like 20 other games they can cater to on Xbox, Ps3, Wii, Ds, PC and probably other gaming consoles too.
> > Even with rules there would still be a bias for weapon placement.
>
> Bias towards weapons that are actually useful.
>
> Is that bad?
What is useful to you might not be useful to someone else. Ever thought of that?