I am hoping to see a greater range of first person mechanics in the next Halo (FPS only - not applicable to any potential remakes that may or may not be on the horizon) game.
What I am referring to is pretty standard in a of of shooters these days and I know some will disagree entirely as it will be deemed to be “un-Halo like”. I say that is folly. I wish to enjoy a higher fidelity game where I do not have to jump onto something that is waist high when I can simply mount it.
Ledge-grabbing would also be appreciated where applicable. It seems redundant to jump way above a particular object’s overall mass to land on it, when it could just as easily be climbed/mantled. They could be made context sensitive. I would also appreciate keeping the jumping mechanic as it is as we are all familiar with its uses.
I do not play COD but I can respect some of the basic mechanics it employs in the various iterations of that franchise. I thought Crysis 2 did a great job regarding ledge-grabbing. Its not a bad thing to look to other games in the same market for some ideas to at least consider.
I love Halo and I am old school but I do feel that when playing other shooters on rare occasion, there are things that could be adopted. I felt Halo 4 was a missed opportunity for some improvements. As silly as this seems, I was really grateful the developers added the first person animation of when the player pushes a button. Its not a big deal but it was a nice touch (pardon the pun) that had me more invested in the overall fidelity.
Lastly… Why is that that a 26th-century-genetically-and-cybernetically-enhanced-super-soldier complete with the latest firmware of Mjolnir armour cannot see in the dark? Promethean Vision made sense in multiplayer, but in campaign, it was a cheap way of being able to spot enemies. I do not care to see through walls (as handy as that is) when I cannot even get a basic night vision or vision enhancement. You would think that feature would be standard issue if you were any kind of soldier in that era. Surely? Even more so when it has been prevalent in some form in both ODST and Reach respectively. Its a step backwards. I want to be IMMERSED, not frustrated that the game is not evolving with anachronistic game mechanics. Its should play as if it were 26th century, not 2001.
I think that is why they have so many varied game types. SWAT is easily be their fastest game type. I just want more immersion from a first person perspective…
I fully disagree with mantling/ledge grabbing solely because of how profoundly it would change map development. I Forge a lot and I hold crouch jumps sacred.
As for first person animations, I like what 343 was going for in H4 when it came to 1st person actions, (buttons etc) but it would be interesting to see more.
Maybe in Campaign, large enemies can knock Master Chief down with a heavy melee (a la Far Cry) in first person. Or a pickup animation for weapons? idk
But, leave the mantling to other games… I enjoy building maps with crouch jumps integrated that just wouldn’t be possible with that, and I think it’s important to Halo’s feel.
> I think that is why they have so many varied game types. SWAT is easily be their fastest game type. I just want more immersion from a first person perspective…
>
> Thanks for contributing
As far as immersion goes, I think 343 is on the right track. I would like more control over QTEs.
Thanks for your constructive feedback. I must concede, I totally forgot about crouch jumping… Personally, I have a rather mixed opinion regarding their use, but I can see how others do cherish that particular mechanic.
> I like the idea of a mix up of fps mechanics, but not the one you presented.
Pretty much this. Didn’t vote either, to biased.
Halo has great vertical combat already. Lets try not to change that original formula at least. I can’t think of another great game that has such good vertical combat than Halo.
Cannon=/=Gameplay. And anyways Spartans don’t need VISR or “nigh vision”. Its already implemented. Its on 24/7, some places are probably extremely dark/low light environments but we cannot tell because night vision is already on for our Spartan.
I wouldnt say the hud or anything needs to be overhauled but the where you are in real time they need to run the connections off of a standardized clock that everyone can see because getting shot through the head when your screen shows you else where but because they are running slower it still kills you or vice versa
> > I like the idea of a mix up of fps mechanics, but not the one you presented.
>
>
> Cannon=/=Gameplay. And anyways Spartans don’t need VISR or “nigh vision”. Its already implemented. Its on 24/7, some places are probably extremely dark/low light environments but we cannot tell because night vision is already on for our Spartan.
I disagree. There is no night vision in Halo 4 other than Promethean Vision (PV) which is not what I was referring. If night vision is already implemented in canon, why is it not actually applicable in game? It was a deliberate move by 343 to diminish night vision and implement PV in its stead. While I can see merit in seeing through walls, not being able to see in the dark if you do not have PV equipped as an ‘armour ability’ is a dated mechanic. They should adhere to the canon created and provide us the gamer with the tools to do the job of a Spartan effectively.
Perhaps 343 could enable an automatic visual adjustment so when the player walks into a dark place, the visor automatically detects the light spectrum and adjusts accordingly, rather than the player having to manually activate it a la previous iterations of Halo games?
Please take into account that this is only really for the campaign. Mulitplayer can be forgiven for making some sacrifices of certain campaign specific mechanics. Example - Killzone had their cover mechanic but omitted it from multiplayer (at least they did so in KZ2 & KZ3).
I feel very strongly about animations which disrupt the player’s actions. When there is an animation which is completely out of the player’s control, it limits the player’s ability to do things. It takes control away from them.
It’s less of an issue in games where the player has to stop moving in order to shoot accurately, but in a movement oriented game such as Halo, shooting while jumping over an obstacles is often necessary. And even though this problem can be worked around by simply enabling shooting and making the animation passive, the player is still forced on one linear movement path. They still aren’t in full control of their character.
The second issue I have pertains particularly to ledge grabbing, but applies to other movement animations as well. Animations make actions easier. Instead of requiring the player to time their actions right, e.g. to land a difficult jump, the player is only required to do half of the jump, and then the game takes over and does the rest for them. Due to the nature of how the animations work, they also have an enormous margin for error. In a game where the player is allowed to grab ledges, it’s practically impossible to fail a jump.
This error tolerance strips away all the depth from the movement. There is little difference between a player who is good at movement, and another who is bad. Failing a jump means nothing unless you completely manage to screw it up. With Halo being a very movement oriented game, this would be a real hit to its gameplay depth.
In my eyes more animations does not equal more immersion, it’s quite the opposite. I’m immersed in the game when I have a lot of control over my actions. When I’m forced into an animation or a quick time event, I have to do things exactly the way the game wants me to do them. There is no freedom in it, and as far as games are considered, freedom is what immerses me in the game in the first place.
That’s not to say games that are more like interactive movies are an inherently bad thing. They just are in their own bubble, which in my opinion should be kept completely separate of the bubble which Halo occupies.
> I feel very strongly about animations which disrupt the player’s actions. When there is an animation which is completely out of the player’s control, it limits the player’s ability to do things. It takes control away from them.
>
> It’s less of an issue in games where the player has to stop moving in order to shoot accurately, but in a movement oriented game such as Halo, shooting while jumping over an obstacles is often necessary. And even though this problem can be worked around by simply enabling shooting and making the animation passive, the player is still forced on one linear movement path. They still aren’t in full control of their character.
>
> The second issue I have pertains particularly to ledge grabbing, but applies to other movement animations as well. Animations make actions easier. Instead of requiring the player to time their actions right, e.g. to land a difficult jump, the player is only required to do half of the jump, and then the game takes over and does the rest for them. Due to the nature of how the animations work, they also have an enormous margin for error. In a game where the player is allowed to grab ledges, it’s practically impossible to fail a jump.
>
> This error tolerance strips away all the depth from the movement. There is little difference between a player who is good at movement, and another who is bad. Failing a jump means nothing unless you completely manage to screw it up. With Halo being a very movement oriented game, this would be a real hit to its gameplay depth.
>
> In my eyes more animations does not equal more immersion, it’s quite the opposite. I’m immersed in the game when I have a lot of control over my actions. When I’m forced into an animation or a quick time event, I have to do things exactly the way the game wants me to do them. There is no freedom in it, and as far as games are considered, freedom is what immerses me in the game in the first place.
>
> That’s not to say games that are more like interactive movies are an inherently bad thing. They just are in their own bubble, which in my opinion should be kept completely separate of the bubble which Halo occupies.
> When there is an animation which is completely out of the player’s control, it limits the player’s ability to do things. It takes control away from them.
This is exactly how I feel. I’ve played and loved all three of the first Thief games, but the newest one was almost unplayable for me, and one of the big reasons for that was the unnecessary animations. Nearly every action was followed by a brief moment of inactivity on my part as I simply watched while the game moved for me. Worse, the game had to “guess” what I was trying to do so it could do it for me, and it didn’t always guess right.
IMHO some elements from other FPS games should be borrowed into Halo, but they should be restricted to the single player stuff only.
The multiplayer should stick to its roots.
For eg : Sprinting in campaign is cool. Sprinting away from a deserved kill for someone else is not in Multiplayer.
> > > I like the idea of a mix up of fps mechanics, but not the one you presented.
> >
> >
> > Cannon=/=Gameplay. And anyways Spartans don’t need VISR or “nigh vision”. Its already implemented. Its on 24/7, some places are probably extremely dark/low light environments but we cannot tell because night vision is already on for our Spartan.
>
> I disagree. There is no night vision in Halo 4 other than Promethean Vision (PV) which is not what I was referring. If night vision is already implemented in canon, why is it not actually applicable in game?
It has been said (and referenced by many Spartans in numerous Halo Novels) by John when he first had MJOLNIR and was testing it he noted how when he was in low light environments MJOLNIR automatically adjusted.
> I feel very strongly about animations which disrupt the player’s actions. When there is an animation which is completely out of the player’s control, it limits the player’s ability to do things. It takes control away from them.
>
> It’s less of an issue in games where the player has to stop moving in order to shoot accurately, but in a movement oriented game such as Halo, shooting while jumping over an obstacles is often necessary. And even though this problem can be worked around by simply enabling shooting and making the animation passive, the player is still forced on one linear movement path. They still aren’t in full control of their character.
>
> The second issue I have pertains particularly to ledge grabbing, but applies to other movement animations as well. Animations make actions easier. Instead of requiring the player to time their actions right, e.g. to land a difficult jump, the player is only required to do half of the jump, and then the game takes over and does the rest for them. Due to the nature of how the animations work, they also have an enormous margin for error. In a game where the player is allowed to grab ledges, it’s practically impossible to fail a jump.
>
> This error tolerance strips away all the depth from the movement. There is little difference between a player who is good at movement, and another who is bad. Failing a jump means nothing unless you completely manage to screw it up. With Halo being a very movement oriented game, this would be a real hit to its gameplay depth.
>
> In my eyes more animations does not equal more immersion, it’s quite the opposite. I’m immersed in the game when I have a lot of control over my actions. When I’m forced into an animation or a quick time event, I have to do things exactly the way the game wants me to do them. There is no freedom in it, and as far as games are considered, freedom is what immerses me in the game in the first place.
>
> That’s not to say games that are more like interactive movies are an inherently bad thing. They just are in their own bubble, which in my opinion should be kept completely separate of the bubble which Halo occupies.
While you do raise some great points, I disagree when it comes to personal immersion of the game. I hear what you are saying with regard to certain games holing your hand in certain gameplay elements, however I personally feel more first person contextualised mechanics should be introduced in the next iteration of the game (campaign only).
> IMHO some elements from other FPS games should be borrowed into Halo, but they should be restricted to the single player stuff only.
> The multiplayer should stick to its roots.
> For eg : Sprinting in campaign is cool. Sprinting away from a deserved kill for someone else is not.
Sprinting was a desperately needed addition to a franchise that was lagging behind other shooters.
> > > > I like the idea of a mix up of fps mechanics, but not the one you presented.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cannon=/=Gameplay. And anyways Spartans don’t need VISR or “nigh vision”. Its already implemented. Its on 24/7, some places are probably extremely dark/low light environments but we cannot tell because night vision is already on for our Spartan.
> >
> > I disagree. There is no night vision in Halo 4 other than Promethean Vision (PV) which is not what I was referring. If night vision is already implemented in canon, why is it not actually applicable in game?
>
> It has been said (and referenced by many Spartans in numerous Halo Novels) by John when he first had MJOLNIR and was testing it he noted how when he was in low light environments MJOLNIR automatically adjusted.
Okay… I have read the books and I am aware of the canon regarding Mjolnir armour and the various appendages that it encompasses… But I want to play a GAME rather than read a book and if the game does not allow me (the player/Spartan) to see in the dark (when dark lit levels are applicable) only to have to pick up an armour ability is a flawed game mechanic. I care little for canon when it demonstrably impacts on my overall immersion for the game itself.
I could easily forgive it playing Halo CE when the chief had a flashlight feature attached to his helmet, but that was in 2001. There should be an array of features the player should have at his disposal (because you keep referring back to the books and all of the attributes that are illustrated in them) but the player does not get a full representation of those features IN GAME. One of those is the ability to have some sort of night vision which we do not get to utilise at all. Are we now clear?
A good exapmple: Crysis 2 = Nanovision - its a brilliant mechanic. Reach and ODST had VISR. Again, I know what is stipulated with regard to canon, however it is still a broken mechanic to not have it implemented in game. Playing as the Master Chief should mean I am a 26th century bad@ss with a full compliment of the most high-tech gear at my disposal… Its not prevalent in Halo 4 and after playing Reach where I could utilise night vision/VISR, even though it is manually activated (as opposed to automated a la the books/canon), it is still a step backwards.
