Important poll to let 343 know....

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

In my opinion, we shouldn’t have these 3 mechanics in halo. There are many arguments as to why, as I will explain below. Before that, I want to stress the importance of this. We must make 343 look at us and say, “they obviously don’t want this”, or “they obviously do want this”. They need to know what we want as a community. While some of you may not have the same opinion, and that’s fine, but I would like you to voice your opinion with constructive posts so that this thread doesn’t devolve into a flame war.

Sprint: most of us know why this doesn’t work for halo. It causes maps to be larger, trick jumps to be dumbed down, and slows down gameplay because it allows people to run away at the touch of a button. Not only this, but it succeeds only in making the game more generic, and is a gimmick at best. Those who try to justify sprint by saying it takes skill to know when not to sprint; it’s common sense, not skill. In reality if someone was shooting at you, you wouldn’t run at them, because you don’t want to get shot, you’d run away from them, which is exactly what sprinting promotes and is a needless crutch.

Perks: in my eyes, these are just unbalanced gimmicks which only make my less of a spartan because it is basically a sacrifice mechanic. By that I mean I’m picking one ability in place of another, both of which were base traits in previous games. If I had all of them as base traits like in h3 or reach, I would be able to make my own play style just as easily and it’d be much more balanced that way. Not only this but people can win because of a perk. I.e, survivor, which sends a person flying into the air, giving a person who should have died, a Hight advantage, with which he could kill another player. I’ve done this before, and it’s been done to me, and it isn’t balanced or right.

Flinch: this is the least of my concerns out of this list, but never the less, needs to be removed. What flinch does is make long range combat much less skillful, and much more disorienting than it needs to be. The balance between automatics and scoped weapons is almost shattered because the autos can’t do their job and lay down suppressing fire. Weapons like the sniper cause far too much flinch and don’t receive enough, therefor making sniping much easier in the process. Descope was simple, you get shot you get kicked out of scope, but your reticule stayed on the target so you could still win a battle you didn’t start if you were good enough. Now your scope just flicks around randomly, Which is worse for newer players than descope was. The logic behind implementing it was that descope was too punishing, which is untrue, in fact it’s the opposite.

This is why I don’t like these mechanics, but you are allowed you own opinion, and I want you to post it, so that 343 is aware of the public opinion behind these controversial implementations. Whether positive or negative.

2

Halo 4 perks especially were unnecessary because they were just recycled features from old games, only turned into attachments. I guess they were running low on ideas at the time. They didn’t need to be there, so i don’t know why they were. Additionally, flinch is my most hated feature of the lot. It cause too much randomness and harms accuracy. A 1v1 show down with this feature is very annoying. Of the 3, i’d say sprinting is the most acceptable, because it is not nearly as frustrating for me, as the other 2. Yet again, however, its is unnecessary.

3

Well, this depends.
Do we strive for a quality game?
Or do we strive for mass appeal?

Let me explain JC Penny syndrome. JC Penny stopped putting everything “on sale” for like 80% of the year and just set prices to what they should be instead. Obviously, this is the best for the consumer. The store isn’t trying to trick you into thinking you are getting a great deal. The store is just being up front and honest.

But JC Penny almost plummeted. Because consumers don’t understand that they are getting a better deal. Getting a $20 pair of jeans for $20? Alright. Getting a “$60” pair of jeans for $20? Feels great.

Removing perks and giving everyone access to every trait is objectively better, but it also doesn’t feel better to your average consumer.

Obviously, 343I is an AAA company and is going to go for mass (aka Casual) appeal. Sprint and Perks are highly enjoyed, but at least we can get Descope back, simply because there hasn’t been any strong feelings one way or the other for it by your average gamer.

If I were designing the game for me, I would throw all of the above out.
But since 343I is a company, it’s best we keep them in.

4

I really think they need to also get rid of the custom loadouts as Halo never had custom loadouts before 4. It pissed me off when I realized that Halo 4 is just another one of those CoD clones, and I am fed up with it. In fact, I haven’t touched Halo 4 since who knows when because it wasn’t built like a Halo game at all.

343 needs to get rid of the always there sprint, flinching and most importantly, the perks. Quit trying to be like CoD and make the game the way Bungie would have made it. For those of you who disagree, Bungie actually made good maps and game types that were fun and inventive.

Halo 5 NEEDS to go back to Halo 3 styled gameplay, that way it is fair for people and you don’t have everyone using the most OP weapon (I am looking at the DMR). If they would look at why Halo 3 and Reach have bigger populations and see what makes them better as a whole, then they might make a better game.

5

> Well, this depends.
> Do we strive for a quality game?
> Or do we strive for mass appeal?
>
> Let me explain JC Penny syndrome. JC Penny stopped putting everything “on sale” for like 80% of the year and just set prices to what they should be instead. Obviously, this is the best for the consumer. The store isn’t trying to trick you into thinking you are getting a great deal. The store is just being up front and honest.
>
> But JC Penny almost plummeted. Because consumers don’t understand that they are getting a better deal. Getting a $20 pair of jeans for $20? Alright. Getting a “$60” pair of jeans for $20? Feels great.
>
> Removing perks and giving everyone access to every trait is objectively better, but it also doesn’t feel better to your average consumer.
>
> Obviously, 343I is an AAA company and is going to go for mass (aka Casual) appeal. Sprint and Perks are highly enjoyed, but at least we can get Descope back, simply because there hasn’t been any strong feelings one way or the other for it by your average gamer.
>
> If I were designing the game for me, I would throw all of the above out.
> But since 343I is a company, it’s best we keep them in.

Just because they are trying to appeal to the casual base, does not mean they can’t appeal to all sections of the community. They should strive to designate specific playlists with these features implemented, as effectively as they should for those who are not a very big fan of them. I like AAs (to an extent) but are they in EVERY playlist? I think not. The same should happen for every feature. BTB should have Infinity Slayer settings, because it just seems more effectively designed for said features, and perhaps Team Slayer should have all of the past settings that did not have the newly introduced features. There are ways where everyone can get their fair share, but until the various updates over the past year, it kind of felt that Halo 4 was lacking this.

6

> Just because they are trying to appeal to the casual base, does not mean they can’t appeal to all sections of the community. They should strive to designate specific playlists with these features implemented, as effectively as they should for those who are not a very big fan of them. I like AAs (to an extent) but are they in EVERY playlist? I think not. The same should happen for every feature. BTB should have Infinity Slayer settings, because it just seems more effectively designed for said features, and perhaps Team Slayer should have all of the past settings that did not have the newly introduced features. There are ways where everyone can get their fair share, but until the various updates over the past year, it kind of felt that Halo 4 was lacking this.

Sure, we’ve always done this. We’ve always trimmed the fat.

The problem is, we’re now trying to trim the fat off of bacon. Certain mechanics will impact ALL gametypes, even indirectly. For instance, the addition of sprint impacts map design, meaning no-sprint gametypes will either need tweaked weapons or tweaked maps.

And having 64v64 warfare would mean weapons need to be much longer ranged than they are now, impacting 4v4 play.

We could have different weapon and player traits for different playlists, but now we are trying to create two or more wildly different experiences in one game.

Some things can be made to work, some can not.

7

> I really think they need to also get rid of the custom loadouts as Halo never had custom loadouts before 4. It pissed me off when I realized that Halo 4 is just another one of those CoD clones, and I am fed up with it. In fact, I haven’t touched Halo 4 since who knows when because it wasn’t built like a Halo game at all.

Oh sure remove such a good feature which can be balanced because COD who most certainly invented loadouts has it.

Custom loadouts work completely fine if they didnt allow grenade choice, didnt have the boltshot, DMR, LR and plasma pistol as options and didnt include perks. (AAs are fine in my opinion but thats a different topic and whether they remain in loadouts is dependent on wether theyre in halo 5) having custom loadouts doesnt make it a COD clone at all. ‘Oh but COD has it’ so what, COD has guns should no other game have guns then.

You will then refer to ‘arena shooter and equal spawns’ you can have an arena shooter with loadouts if its a small choice and equal spawns dont mean identical spawns.

Halo 4 was built like a halo game but it wasnt as strong a link with all the added stuff.

8

> > Just because they are trying to appeal to the casual base, does not mean they can’t appeal to all sections of the community. They should strive to designate specific playlists with these features implemented, as effectively as they should for those who are not a very big fan of them. I like AAs (to an extent) but are they in EVERY playlist? I think not. The same should happen for every feature. BTB should have Infinity Slayer settings, because it just seems more effectively designed for said features, and perhaps Team Slayer should have all of the past settings that did not have the newly introduced features. There are ways where everyone can get their fair share, but until the various updates over the past year, it kind of felt that Halo 4 was lacking this.
>
> Sure, we’ve always done this. We’ve always trimmed the fat.
>
> The problem is, we’re now trying to trim the fat off of bacon. Certain mechanics will impact ALL gametypes, even indirectly. For instance, the addition of sprint impacts map design, meaning no-sprint gametypes will either need tweaked weapons or tweaked maps.
>
> And having 64v64 warfare would mean weapons need to be much longer ranged than they are now, impacting 4v4 play.
>
> We could have different weapon and player traits for different playlists, but now we are trying to create two or more wildly different experiences in one game.
>
> Some things can be made to work, some can not.

Depends on how 64v64 maps are designed since they can just be several BTB maps grouped together and divided in a way like avalanche was, even then you could have different loadout choices become available in these gamemodes with the DMR,NR,LR becoming options.

9

> We could have different weapon and player traits for different playlists, but now we are trying to create two or more wildly different experiences in one game.
>
> Some things can be made to work, some can not.

Hence, the reason why people are now saying that it just doesn’t feel like Halo anymore. It doesn’t need to have all of these radical decisions that make it different to what it originally was. 343i have 2 ways to address this situation; A) Go back to Halo’s original layout design (before Reach) and build from there, or B) Create two different mega playlists that give off a completely different experience than the other. Now, while the latter may seem abit much, they need to show that they are catering for both sides if they really have a hope in restoring this community to its former glory.

In truth, i think they simply ran out of ideas, and thats why they needed to include so many COD-like features. Bungie already spent a whole trilogy building on individual ideas, and so, when you are trying to create an individual game with individual ideas, your creativity is pretty limited to your own imagination. And lets be honest, how much imagination can go into a FPS game. Some ideas work in Campaign, but not all of them work in MP. Thats the dilemma i believe 343i faced: ‘What next?’

10

With tweaks sprint can work, and I just don’t see i being removed anyway. Fighting to remove it is a wasted effort in my opinion. As for the other two, they are much more destructive to Halo and I’m sure that at least Flinch will get axed. Hopefully perks will get destroyed too, they will never be balanced in a game with long kill times (Halo’s kill times are much longer than CoD, for instance, which is mostly just one-hit-kills).

11

> > We could have different weapon and player traits for different playlists, but now we are trying to create two or more wildly different experiences in one game.
> >
> > Some things can be made to work, some can not.
>
> Hence, the reason why people are now saying that it just doesn’t feel like Halo anymore. It doesn’t need to have all of these radical decisions that make it different to what it originally was. 343i have 2 ways to address this situation; A) Go back to Halo’s original layout design (before Reach) and build from there, or B) Create two different mega playlists that give off a completely different experience than the other. Now, while the latter may seem abit much, they need to show that they are catering for both sides if they really have a hope in restoring this community to its former glory.

Actually I’d prefer Option B and it is completely possible. Reach had a thing with divided Playlists if I recall. Social Playlists, and Ranked Playlists.
If anyone remembers Rainbox Six Vegas 2, they allowed you to host your own games and ban certain weapons. If that game allowed each individual person to host their own rules, why can Halo One not?

It’s as easy as…

Social Playlists- fully custom loadouts allowed. Separate ranking. For those who enjoy fun without as much pain. Ordnance varies with game type.

Ranked Playlists- Grenades set to Frag. DMR, LR, Boltshot, Plasma Pistol locked. No Ordnance.

Also, I like Sprint, Perks, and AAs. But I don’t like CoD at all. If anything, Flinch is a pain. But what halo needs isn’t a change of mechanics. It needs better balancing. Being able to run away when you know you’re outnumbered is only logical. It doesn’t need to be justified. A super soldier can sprint? HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY THAT! No. Just no. As for perks… I think it makes sense for Some spartans to have Dexterity or Stealth. Just like some soldiers in real life can reload their weapons faster than others, or sneak more proficiently. It isn’t game breaking and it would make no sense if everyone had everything.

12

> Well, this depends.
> Do we strive for a quality game?
> Or do we strive for mass appeal?
>
> Let me explain JC Penny syndrome. JC Penny stopped putting everything “on sale” for like 80% of the year and just set prices to what they should be instead. Obviously, this is the best for the consumer. The store isn’t trying to trick you into thinking you are getting a great deal. The store is just being up front and honest.
>
> But JC Penny almost plummeted. Because consumers don’t understand that they are getting a better deal. Getting a $20 pair of jeans for $20? Alright. Getting a “$60” pair of jeans for $20? Feels great.
>
> Removing perks and giving everyone access to every trait is objectively better, but it also doesn’t feel better to your average consumer.
>
> Obviously, 343I is an AAA company and is going to go for mass (aka Casual) appeal. Sprint and Perks are highly enjoyed, but at least we can get Descope back, simply because there hasn’t been any strong feelings one way or the other for it by your average gamer.
>
> If I were designing the game for me, I would throw all of the above out.
> But since 343I is a company, it’s best we keep them in.

You are making the assumption that “mass appeal” is the same thing as “appeal for Halo casuals.” This is not true.

Let me explain:
Go into any random halo match, and some players will despise AA’s while others like them. It can go either way. Generally those who don’t like them are long-time fans since Halo 1 or 2. Those who like them are more casual fans who either only play occasionally, or play a lot but didn’t start since Halo: Reach.

But when I talk to people who are “the masses,” aka not already Halo fans… there really is no controvoursey. When Halo Reach came out, I was still in College with a program intake of about 120 students. It’s Comp. Sci. so literally 100% of the intake consisted of nerd gamers who will buy product if it’s good. Yet only several of them played Halo, while all the others constantly made the same complaint,

“Special abilities? Isn’t that, like… for little kids?” and then they blow it off before even trying because they think it’s just about childish gimmicks.

The masses actually want an FPS to be an FPS. Halo casuals are the ones that like AA’s. These two groups are not necessarily the same people, it just seems that way because the casuals are the ones who make up the bulk of players on launch day… but this is BECAUSE the game was marketed towards them, towards people who want gimmicks and/or “CoD in space.”

13

It’s not like custom loadouts, PODs, or any other Infinity feature should be discarded simply because they are included in CoD. CoD is the perfect embodiment of the “instant-gratification” FPS. Halo has always been about strategy and victory over your opponents; CoD cares about neither, but is instead about getting the next insta-kill and 'splody thing. So when something in Halo 4 is compared to something in CoD, that person is saying that that thing is mindless, childish, and sacrifices quality of gratification for quantity of gratification.

Halo 4 is the perfect embodiment of the instant-gratification Halo game. Custom loadouts that are complete with perks and AAs encourage players to do whatever they want regardless of what their teammates are doing. Long-range weapons were introduced in loadouts to give players a way to kill other players without putting themselves at risk. Flinch was introduced to make this easier. PODs allow players to get fun 'splody guns and get awsum killz with them without the need to control the spawn first or kill a teammate (and if you didn’t get what you wanted in your POD, there’s always the chance of an ROD). And instead of having a penalty for dying, Sprint allows players to get back into the action faster because God forbid they spend five more seconds not shooting their 'splody gun.

Everything about Halo 4’s Infinity settings were designed so that players could have fun shooting stuff without thinking, and Halo 4 failed because it still wasn’t as good at that as CoD. Until thought and strategy are put back into Halo, perhaps through on-map pickups and same starts, perhaps not, it will always be just another generic shooter.

14

This is my normal response:

Remove personal ordinance
Keep loadouts (tweak further)
AA’s as map pickups except sprint (cause we’re Spartans)
WELL DESIGNED MAPS TO SUPPORT THIS ALL

15

> You are making the assumption that “mass appeal” is the same thing as “appeal for Halo casuals.” This is not true.

Looking at popular gaming trends, I find it difficult to believe competitive gamers are the majority, at least on the console market.

What do you think sells more? Quake, or all these Candy Crush / Angry Birds Iphone apps we have now? I can give numerous examples of titles that are unarguably more deep or competitive than their AAA alternatives, yet sell much less. CSGO vs CoD, Super Meat Boy vs Mario, Quake vs Halo.

Why did 343I market to casuals to begin with? Because it’s a safe approach that has proven to work over and over again.

Competitive gamers will have to turn to indie titles in the future to get their fix.

16

> > You are making the assumption that “mass appeal” is the same thing as “appeal for Halo casuals.” This is not true.
>
> Looking at popular gaming trends, I find it difficult to believe competitive gamers are the majority, at least on the console market.
>
> What do you think sells more? Quake, or all these Candy Crush / Angry Birds Iphone apps we have now? I can give numerous examples of titles that are unarguably more deep or competitive than their AAA alternatives, yet sell much less. CSGO vs CoD, Super Meat Boy vs Mario, Quake vs Halo.
>
> Why did 343I market to casuals to begin with? Because it’s a safe approach that has proven to work over and over again.
>
> Competitive gamers will have to turn to indie titles in the future to get their fix.

Well here’s the problem, it didn’t work. The player count plummeted and sales have grinned to a halt. You could say that appealing to the masses was playing it safe, but there is only a chance of that working out for the best. We should focus on appealing to the mass HALO crowd rather than the mass crowd in general. The former kept the game alive while the latter killed the game in a few months.

17

> It’s not like custom loadouts, PODs, or any other Infinity feature should be discarded simply because they are included in CoD. CoD is the perfect embodiment of the “instant-gratification” FPS. Halo has always been about strategy and victory over your opponents; CoD cares about neither, but is instead about getting the next insta-kill and 'splody thing. So when something in Halo 4 is compared to something in CoD, that person is saying that that thing is mindless, childish, and sacrifices quality of gratification for quantity of gratification.
>
> Halo 4 is the perfect embodiment of the instant-gratification Halo game. Custom loadouts that are complete with perks and AAs encourage players to do whatever they want regardless of what their teammates are doing. Long-range weapons were introduced in loadouts to give players a way to kill other players without putting themselves at risk. Flinch was introduced to make this easier. PODs allow players to get fun 'splody guns and get awsum killz with them without the need to control the spawn first or kill a teammate (and if you didn’t get what you wanted in your POD, there’s always the chance of an ROD). And instead of having a penalty for dying, Sprint allows players to get back into the action faster because God forbid they spend five more seconds not shooting their 'splody gun.
>
> Everything about Halo 4’s Infinity settings were designed so that players could have fun shooting stuff without thinking, and Halo 4 failed because it still wasn’t as good at that as CoD. Until thought and strategy are put back into Halo, perhaps through on-map pickups and same starts, perhaps not, it will always be just another generic shooter.

Equal starts don’t just Imply identical starts. If two weapons have perfect accuracy and the same kill time, with equally fast moving projectile based bullets, and the same overall range, aim assist, red reticule range, bullet magnetism, than equal starts is achieved through the balance of the weapons. The light rifle and DMR are the closest to this kind of balance, although I think long range rifle should be on the map rather than in loadouts. A better scenario would between the br and the carbine if they were balanced as such.

People on here seem to think that if some options in loadouts unbalance them, than the whole concept should be removed, which is a terrible way to go about balancing a game. The problem is not loadouts or armor abilities, the problem is what is allowed in loadouts, or how a specific armor ability is designed. These concepts were executed badly, but the concept itself is not inherently flawed.

Personal ordnance… I’m iffy on. I think I know a way to fix it, but I’m not sure if it is really needed at all.

18

> Well here’s the problem, it didn’t work. The player count plummeted and sales have grinned to a halt. You could say that appealing to the masses was playing it safe, but there is only a chance of that working out for the best. We should focus on appealing to the mass HALO crowd rather than the mass crowd in general. The former kept the game alive while the latter killed the game in a few months.

You can make a game that appeals to casual players without it being as random and unpredictable as Infinity Slayer, and you can make a game that appeals to competitive players without it being as hardcore as Halo 3’s MLG settings. The reason the multiplayers in Halos 1-3 were so popular wasn’t that they were extremely casual or extremely competitive. The reason was that the default multiplayer settings had just the right balance of competitive and accessible. Halo 3’s competitive ranked Team Slayer playlist and noncompetitive Social Slayer playlist used the same gametypes and everyone loved it. What’s more, if you wanted a slightly more competitive experience, you had MLG playlists; if you wanted a slightly less competitive experience, you had Action Sack and Multi-Team.

The casual vs. competitive war is imaginary. It is the developers, not the players, who overstep boundaries and make a game too casual or too competitive. If the developers did their jobs correctly, no one would care about casual vs. competitive because we would all be playing the same game, just perhaps in separate playlists with slightly different settings.

> Equal starts don’t just Imply identical starts. If two weapons have perfect accuracy and the same kill time, with equally fast moving projectile based bullets, and the same overall range, aim assist, red reticule range, bullet magnetism, than equal starts is achieved through the balance of the weapons.

I don’t disagree, which is why I specified AAs and perks. I would be interested in trying a variation of Legendary BRs that included a Carbine/SR loadout to see how it plays. It may need more tweaking though, because with the Carbine’s faster RoF and longer range compared to the BR, it may be a bit OP in 1v1 engagements.

19

> Well here’s the problem, it didn’t work. The player count plummeted and sales have grinned to a halt. You could say that appealing to the masses was playing it safe, but there is only a chance of that working out for the best. We should focus on appealing to the mass HALO crowd rather than the mass crowd in general. The former kept the game alive while the latter killed the game in a few months.

It didn’t work.

But assuming there’s a massive group of fans just waiting for a good Halo game out there isn’t guaranteed to work either.

> You can make a game that appeals to casual players without it being as random and unpredictable as Infinity Slayer, and you can make a game that appeals to competitive players without it being as hardcore as Halo 3’s MLG settings. The reason the multiplayers in Halos 1-3 were so popular wasn’t that they were extremely casual or extremely competitive. The reason was that the default multiplayer settings had just the right balance of competitive and accessible. Halo 3’s competitive ranked Team Slayer playlist and noncompetitive Social Slayer playlist used the same gametypes and everyone loved it. What’s more, if you wanted a slightly more competitive experience, you had MLG playlists; if you wanted a slightly less competitive experience, you had Action Sack and Multi-Team.

I wish you would’ve said this in that “Halo 5 playlist” thread. I was thinking the same thing but couldn’t put it to words.

We can split skill levels, but we can’t effectively split game design.

> The casual vs. competitive war is imaginary.

I disagree, but not entirely.

The problem is casuals do not comprehend competitive play. They take one look at MLG and say “Oh MLG must hate automatics because they are banned” without understanding that “MLG does not hate automatics, they hate Halo’s automatics”.

So then you get ignorant casuals people bashing competitive play on entirely false pretenses like “THEY ONLY WANT BR STARTS” or “THEY HATE ANY NEW ADDITION TO THE GAME” without even stopping to think for a moment as to just why they have only BR’s, or just why they remove specific additions.

20

> > The casual vs. competitive war is imaginary.
>
> I disagree, but not entirely.
>
> The problem is casuals do not comprehend competitive play. They take one look at MLG and say “Oh MLG must hate automatics because they are banned” without understanding that “MLG does not hate automatics, they hate Halo’s automatics”.
>
> So then you get ignorant casuals people bashing competitive play on entirely false pretenses like “THEY ONLY WANT BR STARTS” or “THEY HATE ANY NEW ADDITION TO THE GAME” without even stopping to think for a moment as to just why they have only BR’s, or just why they remove specific additions.

I think that’s more of a people problem, not a casual player problem. I know of plenty of “casual” players who understand and/or, at the very least, respect competitive rules and players. And, to the credit of the types of people you mentioned, I’ve also seen plenty of competitive players who insult and demean other players because of their rank, K/D, choice of weapon, etc., and are pushy about their gaming preferences; however, I don’t say that all competitive players are rude. Ignorance and rudeness can be found in any person regardless of whether they’re casual, competitive, or don’t like games at all.