testing out.

testing out.

H2A graphics looks better to me then H5 ones from what I have seen.
But graphics not that important for me.

Also at some points there wasnt much going on on the map, but the guy also took questionable paths all the time.

“The entire concept of Warzone is fantastic, I loved it after looking at the Vidoc, but A LOT of people I’ve talked to can agree on the same thing, that 24 players isn’t enough for such an ambitious game mode”

Maybe the fact it is an ambitious game mode is what’s limiting the number of players; so much going on as it is

it’s funny. Here you say they don’t innovate enough.
When they try to innovate people cry cause it’s not the good old Halo anymore.

And then you ask why 343i is hated xD they can’t do nothing xD

Game is 12 vs 12 vs Ai Boss
What are you talking about

First off, pushing the player count up just to “compete” with some other video game is circular and pointless logic. As if Halo and Battlefront are otherwise completely equal in every way, and the decision on which to buy will come down entirely to how many players it can handle in BTB??? I don’t care how many, or few, players are supported as long as the game mode is a) fun b) fully sustainable by the hardware and by the internet connection quality of the typical player.

> 2533275034239520;4:
> it’s funny. Here you say they don’t innovate enough.
> When they try to innovate people cry cause it’s not the good old Halo anymore.
>
> And then you ask why 343i is hated xD they can’t do nothing xD

Where in his post is the OP complaining that it’s no longer the old Halo anymore?

He’s saying that 343 doesn’t seem to be taking full advantage of the console like other 3rd party developers are, and that 343 can definitely do more seeing as they’re Microsoft’s first party studio and should have a better understanding of how the console works.

> 2533274827584261;1:
> The AI’s have, and still look completely uninteresting to fight. While it’s a worthy achievement to actually implement them in the game, 343 only manages to add the generic AI that serve as nothing but Cannon Fodder. Throughout the entire game play video, the Boss AI just stand their taking the shots (you might as well turn them into a bag of points for your team), and the AI that are already in the game serve to do nothing more than be a cushion for bullets.

AI quality is a valid point.

With the ability to offload AI brains to the cloud, it should be possible to make them frighteningly interesting.

Wait… Since when is simply adding more players considered as innovation? I thought the AI, requisition packs and all that were the innovative part, not the 12v12.

> 2533274827584261;1:
> While Warzone looks amazing, I noticed from both 15 minute game play videos that the majority of the combat is Spartan based while the AI’s are only their as pushovers. This concerns me quite a bit seeing as Star Wars: Battlefront 3 takes full advantage of the console to allow for 40 players, even more AI’s, more stuff going on, and still manage to beat Halo while it’s in Pre-Alpha.
>
> The graphics are another concern, a lot of people (including me) have mentioned over at reddit that the graphics seem a bit weird. Halo 5 is most likely close to finished as a final product and it still doesn’t compare graphics wise to Battlefront’s graphics capability. For a company under Microsoft Gaming Studios (the guy’s who literally brought you the xbox), 343 isn’t taking full advantage of the console as much as BF3 is in it’s Pre-Alpha.
>
> Now back to the player count, 24 players is 12 vs 12 (basically adding 4 more players on a normal BTB). What they’re saying is pretty much that they made maps 4X larger than BTB maps, but only added 4 more players per team to compensate for that? I saw the videos showing the 15 minute gameplay, and while it did look fun, a lot of it was running around trying to find other players in this extremely open map. This concerns me seeing as the biggest vehicle you can get is the Phaeton gunship for larger scale battles.
>
> The AI’s have, and still look completely uninteresting to fight. While it’s a worthy achievement to actually implement them in the game, 343 only manages to add the generic AI that serve as nothing but Cannon Fodder. Throughout the entire game play video, the Boss AI just stand their taking the shots (you might as well turn them into a bag of points for your team), and the AI that are already in the game serve to do nothing more than be a cushion for bullets.
>
> The entire concept of Warzone is fantastic, I loved it after looking at the Vidoc, but A LOT of people I’ve talked to can agree on the same thing, that 24 players isn’t enough for such an ambitious game mode.
>
> I sincerely hope there is some way (if any) that 343 can up the player count to at least 32. That way people can actually consider it competitive to other titles. I barely heard anything from the gaming subs on reddit, people are considering Halo as the next dead-end Gears of War, and it’s unsettling to hear that even after watching an explosive trailer for such an ambitious gametype.

So adding more players makes it innovative? Then battlefield is the most innovative game I have ever played

The idea that player count is somehow tied to how “innovative” the multiplayer or how “next gen” the multiplayer is need to be thrown into the sun. Its just so absurd and now one seems to realize that you can’t just ‘up the player count’ and expect the fun to scale without significant compromises.

> 2533274898765950;10:
> > 2533274827584261;1:
> >
>
>
> So adding more players makes it innovative? Then battlefield is the most innovative game I have ever played

Hmm you of beat me too it I was just about to say what exactly is innovative about just adding more players lol.

> 2535416383459646;12:
> > 2533274898765950;10:
> > > 2533274827584261;1:
> > >
> >
> >
> > So adding more players makes it innovative? Then battlefield is the most innovative game I have ever played
>
>
> Hmm you of beat me too it I was just about to say what exactly is innovative about just adding more players lol.

I know lol, that was the first thing that game to my head

Uuh, 24-16=8, not 4. They increased the player limit by 8, not 4.

If innovation is increasing player count, well it might be in some cases, then Battlefront is horse lengths behind MAG with 256 players and Planetside 2 with what I found had the capabilities of 650 players per faction with three factions on one map. Guinnes world records having one battle featuring some 1100 players at one time. MAG being on PS3 and Planetside 2 on the PS4, and even if the PS4 version is moot for whatever reason, MAG was still on the PS3.

> 2533274814289862;7:
> > 2533275034239520;4:
> > it’s funny. Here you say they don’t innovate enough.
> > When they try to innovate people cry cause it’s not the good old Halo anymore.
> >
> > And then you ask why 343i is hated xD they can’t do nothing xD
>
>
> Where in his post is the OP complaining that it’s no longer the old Halo anymore?
>
> He’s saying that 343 doesn’t seem to be taking full advantage of the console like other 3rd party developers are, and that 343 can definitely do more seeing as they’re Microsoft’s first party studio and should have a better understanding of how the console works.

Nopt talking about OP, talking in general.

Warzone just look great, but yes I can see that people want more.
I have always wanted to see a game type like Warzone, but always expected the minimum player count to be 32. I am happy with an increase to 24 players, but you and 343 have started, that the maps are 4 times bigger than any previous halo map, excluding Forge World.Then there will moments when you can’t find anyone. This happens enough with BF, and you have 64 players,
I still think Warzone will be lots of fun, and hope that there are some smaller maps to play on. And I hope that all maps allow 24 players, as you will see some crazy custom games.
I hope we have more vehicles to choose, I didn’t see the Scorpion, Wraith or any UNSC Air Vehicles available to select. I really hope that Halo 5, has all Halo Vehicles included and including some from Halo Wars and completely new ones. Halo 5 needs to be insane to return Halo to its glory if that is possible, I hope it is.

DICE, (Developers of Star Wars: Battlefront) is also the developer of the Battlefield series which is famously known for its 64 player combat. Halo is taking a huge liking to their new advanced AI if they did 40 on 40 teams like Star Wars will be doing it will probably cause so much lag in the system we all would be running our games at 30 fps tops just to make sure it doesn’t burn the disc. AI vs everything else is a lot to take in even for warzone. There is a lot more behind it then you think and judging by the gameplay they’ve shown you’ll probably enjoy it no matter how many players are in your game.

A larger amount of players simply wouldn’t work in Halo because of the length of the kill times.

The difference in graphics is the art style. Battlefront tries to look completely realistic, but Halo doesn’t. It looks a bit cartoony, actually, and I like it. They also had to make some textures less in-depth to reach 1080p 60fps.

By the OPs logic…MAG is the most innovative game ever.

> 2533274939958452;18:
> A larger amount of players simply wouldn’t work in Halo because of the length of the kill times.
>
> The difference in graphics is the art style. Battlefront tries to look completely realistic, but Halo doesn’t. It looks a bit cartoony, actually, and I like it. They also had to make some textures less in-depth to reach it 1080p 60fps.

I agree, Halo has never tried to look real, but has always been bright.

It is BF and COD that compete which each other to try look the most realistic. Which is great, but I’m glad Halo graphics are a little different.

But since Halo 3,the graphics have tried to look sharp and crisp. Which is why Halo 3 still looks awesome today.