the community can't accept change but we need it

Games Halo 5: Guardians
262

> 2533274819567236;256:
> > 2533274848599184;255:
> > Because the guy blocking shots is not trying to fight? He’s just defending himself.
> > It’s fair for fans to not like new Halo. It’s fair to have opinions and views.
> > One side is consistently against any move that 343 makes. I mean I’ve seen people who’d much rather Halo have just died out than become this. Which is rather ignorant and possessive way of viewing a franchise that millions of people play and enjoy.
> > The guy blocking shots is enjoying the game. He is defending his point of view.
> > The idea that Halo is as good as its always been is a poor idea. When McDonald’s is the only thing you’ve ever eaten, it’s hard to start eating salads and quinoa all day. Halo being good is a subjective and relative stance to so many things there is no point arguing it because ultimately, the only thing that matters is how you as a fan feel. And by these forums, we can tell fans feel every which way.
> > Fans want huge changes back to Halo 3, or want Halo 3 with thruster and Halo 5 weapon balance, or a nerf to automatics and return to Halo 3 weapon balance. They want competitive, fair teams, ultimate customization, then want their Spartans to look battle worn and rugged, or have Elites with different hit boxes and then complain about auto aim and bullet mag and missed shots. There’s no compromise when everyone wants something different.
>
>
> That’s all well and good, you know as well as anyone I’ve done my share of arguing. Some people may think Halo is better than it’s ever been, some may think it’s worse than it’s ever been, some are somewhere in between and some may hold any of those opnions only when compared to other franchises. One can think Halo has gotten better at some things and worse at others and still think a game as a whole is better or worse than previous games.
>
> But if someone’s gonna suggests that the evidence I present may not mean what I think it does (which is fine), I think they should at least explain the opposite point of view that they seem to support, because without that the argument amounts to, “maybe, maybe not”. If I tell you (“you” as in anyone) why I believe people generally think Halo has gotten worse and you say you disagree, that’s fine. I just expect you to tell me why you think the opposite, not only why you think I’m wrong, because when I tell you the basis of my point of view, that alone means there’s more legitimacy to my point of view than there is for someone who has no basis for their point of view.
>
> In other words, I’m basing my beliefs on something, while the other side is basing their beliefs - seemingly - on nothing. Even in the many debates about sprint, each side has their own reasons for believing whether or not it should be in the game and they’re both defend their view while arguing against the opposing view. That’s how arguments/ debates/ discussions should be, but that’s never been the case with the argument at hand. That says, to me, that while one side has observations for their point of view, the other has wishful thinking for theirs.

My beliefs are that I like Halo. Do I think Halo could be better, absolutely. Is it great how it is? Yes. Your belief that Halo would be better are a direct result of what has come now. From games that came after Halo 3. I don’t have a post-modern Halo to base my beliefs that sprint works in Halo, the sandbox is balanced, the campaign has a good narrative, etc. That cant happen until they make a sprint-less Halo. I’m not campaigning for Halo to keep sprint. I’m just trying to consider all points of an argument. Too often, people say “X did better than A, so X is the best”.

Example: Kentucky has a perfect record in the NCAA. Cleveland Cavaliers have a perfect record in the NBA. On paper, they seem to be the same. But you cant logically compare the two teams, as one is facing real NBA teams and the other is facing NCAA teams. Likewise, Halo 3 was the king of the NCAA. You must agree, on some level, that the amount of competition in the industry in 2007 is nowhere near as high as it is now. Halo 5 is now in the NBA, and everyone expects it to have that same perfect record. All I’m pointing out is the differences between the NCAA and the NBA.

I just want to go on record and say that I dont really mind either style of Halo. Halo 5, for now, pretty much emulates what I always expected when I read the Halo novels and comic books, but I still enjoyed the hell out of all the other Halo games. I will admit I am more intrigued by 343’s narrative direction than Bungie’s, but they seem to be taking a slow burn approach to the universe that may stretch the story out too far.

My viewpoint is not that Halo is better for this or better for that. I simply like Halo 5 better. What I dont appreciate is when arguments get treated with indifference because someone doesnt believe it deserves the time. Immersion, Halo 3 competition vs Halo 5 competition, the fall of FPS popularity, and the whim of the casual gamer are all topics that are just thrown aside when arguing Halo. That, I dont approve of.

263

> While Halo may have tried to incorporate some aspects of CoD into its design, (such as zoom on the left trigger), I dont really see the movement abilities as a reflection on CoD. I see it as 343 fine tuning what they did wrong with Halo 4. They basically took the best parts of the abilities and combined them into SA. Clamber and Ground Pound work well together, sort of like how the jetpack was used to allow people to traverse maps quicker due to better verticality. Thruster is a much less confusing, more refined way to create space between yourself and someone else, and all the other useless abilities types were gotten rid of (Promethean Vision, Regen Field, etc.)…
>
> Again, population is a weak metric in the 2016 era of video games. Seeing as how the largest demographic of FPS gamers is 18-34, people are much too advanced to simply play one of the many fantastic experiences there are in gaming. I have a huge backlog of games, and sometimes ill spend a week or two not playing Halo. Does that mean Halo is dead to me? Certainly not. I spend my other time on the forums for the damn game, arguing with others.

Overall, you’ve said many great points that I myself can agree with. Specifically, you saying that using populations and sales as a way of arguing without arguing is very understandable and redirects me to something that I feel more inclined to discuss over sales. I agree, quality of community over a quantity of players. But for me, Halo 5 does neither of those because of their focus on justifying the gameplay and competitive scene over making a game for all Halo fans. Halo 5 offers core game mechanics that are well oiled, fast paced, and fluid. However, there are other aspects of Halo that must suffer due to such a high focus on gameplay and map design. I feel that if they extract Sprint and all of the other abilities and try hard enough to focus on all aspects of Halo 6 that will make it Halo, the community will flourish again and out do Halo 5 in population, gameplay, community, and profit.

You said that you don’t see Halo 5 taking from other shooters, but building upon what Halo 4 has struggled with. Yes, they are building upon what Halo 4 lacked but we must ask exactly how they are doing so.

Halo 5 was tasked with a major job to try and build off what Halo 4 left, as well as bringing Halo back to its original roots that Bungie’s Halo’s 1-3 set. Halo 5 did chose to build upon what Halo 4 left with the inclusion of fast-paced gameplay through Sprint and a multitude of other abilities. 343 attempted at pleasing both those that like the original formula and other fans that primarily play other franchises’ shooters. On the surface, this may seem great, adding new game mechanics that appeal to Call of Duty fans, Destiny fans and more, while putting in Even Starts, extracting Loadouts, etc., for the veterans. But that’s not only what true Halo is. With the new abilities, there is no way to offer the original Halo formula that was fine by itself. And, Halo 5’s aspects that built upon Halo 4 are all shown in a game like Destiny and even Call of Duty Advanced Warfare of 2014. Halo 5’s abilities of Sprint, Spartan Charge, Slide, Ground Pound, Stabilizers, Clamber, and even Thrust were all present in Destiny and CoD AW, with its own fancy names smacked over them. Instead of attempting at finding new ways of movement that benefited both a Halo with and without Sprint, 343 looked at other existing shooters for its own mechanics.

Halo 5’s abilities functioned differently than Destiny and AW, but they are all unoriginal and promote a lack of uniqueness and replay value as the original trilogy had. Sprint creates a placebo effect of Halo playing faster, while Halo 5 is designed around the mechanic and (like 343 themselves said) increases map size, which counters the purpose of Sprint, in the first place. Also, 343 spent so much time to justify sprint’s existence by focusing on the many risk/reward factors of Sprint that penalizes players. Yet, its very simple for 343 to communicate a new game that holds the original Halo formula of “Shoot, Grenade, Melee” to the fans by stating, “the game is designed around not having sprint and doesn’t need Sprint for the game to feel faster paced since the maps are small/close quarters”. With all of this said, the point is that 343 decided to give expected, modern-shooter gameplay a third chance in the Halo franchise to appeal to other crowds. Instead of creatively and uniquely building on the original Halo’s mechanics, they took game mechanics directly from other games and offered a complex, but balanced, experience to please all shooter fans. Considering H5’s current state, however, I have a feeling 343 will highly consider Halo 6 without Sprint and build off Halo 3.

Honestly, I just want Halo to be a dominant force in the gaming industry again. Yes, in 2016, people have lives and want to spend as much time as they can with as many different games as they can. But, I want Halo to grab people and give them a game that will not die out due to one set of gameplay, but gameplay that is timeless, varied, and won’t get drained out by the many shooters that share similar mechanics and experiences. I believe that a Halo without Sprint, a Halo that correctly represents an Arena Shooter’s core design, will support every multiplayer match and every campaign mission to have unique experiences like past Halo’s have done for all. The fact that Halo has many of these new abilities restricts, slows, and even breaks Halo 5 by its cat-and-mouse gameplay. In fact, here’s a diagram that sums up the negative effect of Sprint in Halo: http://postimg.org/image/z29lkagi5/

I like Halo 5’s abilities for what they are; its fine that they can be liked in the community. They work very well together and I commend 343 for doing that, BUT for that only. Based on the diagram above, Sprint obviously breaks the game, and, for me, lack the sting factor, or memorable aspects Halo should always strive to reach. Overall, as I’ve said before, since 343 spent much time on making them all work together, it explains why Halo 5 lacks the many social aspects, wide variety of maps, and community features that will make Halo 5 a Halo game, for all Halo fans. If 343 Industries chooses to go against the trends of a modern-FPS and design a game with one movement speed, it will alleviate the process of making a game with two movement speeds. 343 will have more resources to focus on Forge mode, innovative Custom Game Support (such as a Live Custom Games Browser), File Browsers/Share built in the game, an expansive, long, and immersive Campaign, an appealing and intuitive UI, NEW and innovative game modes and game types as well as consistent Social Playlist support, and so much more ALL AT LAUNCH. Instead of making the game viable for players from other shooters, 343 can place themselves with a completely different set of competitors-- that may not even exist yet-- form its own large fan base, and set the trends for other shooters to follow again. This is why I double down on Sprint so much; I believe that Sprint implementation was the cause for Halo 5’s issues.

To close, if 343 fails at creating a simplistic, unique, and easy-to-design game in Halo 6 (one without Sprint), expands on Halo 5’s abilities, and holds a similar list of problems as Halo 5, I’m 99% sure that most of the community won’t analyze the source of those problems, which I believe is Sprint, but the problems, themselves.

264

> 2533274873843883;5:
> > 2533274819567236;3:
> > Yeah, Halo needed change. It was making way too much money and people were playing it way too much.
>
>
> Right, because people leave Halo to spite the developer. It has nothing to do with growing up, getting jobs, getting married, getting mortgages and kids, and just generally moving past gaming as their reason for getting out of bed in the morning.

I’m sorry but I disagree with you recon. My friends are all in the mid or late 30’s and 3/4 of them are married and have kids (A lot of them more then one) The ones that don’t, are with someone (As am I) They all have full times jobs (As do I, actually I run my own business)

They ALL still play video games!! Almost all of them have stopped playing halo because they don’t like how it’s changed so much in a lot of areas. Yet they still play all the other games series from before almost. So getting older has nothing to do with it. Sure, SOME people will stop gaming all together when they get older, but most won’t. Video games are different now then they used to be in the 80’s Video games are now an accepted thing in our culture and is bigger then the movies industry. Yes, you might have less time to play, but if your a real gamer and love video games, your a gamer for life!! I know I am :slight_smile:

Let’s be clear here, I still play video games piles. I’m older then 30 as well. I don’t play as much as when I was 16, but that’s because I have more responsibilities. Not because of any other reason.

I don’t hate Halo 5, not at all in fact… To me it’s a pretty good game, sloppy, but pretty good… but facts and facts here. Halo has lost more and more of it’s players ever since reach. Yes there is more then just one reason and I’m not saying everyone hates halo now. Or anyone that likes Halo 1-3 doesn’t like Halo reach, 4 or 5 either, people do… but the fact remains that halo has lost a lot of players since it drastically changed a variety of things. Again, people getting older plays a very small part in why Halo isn’t as popular as it once was.

265

> 2533274815533909;264:
> > 2533274873843883;5:
> > > 2533274819567236;3:
> > > Yeah, Halo needed change. It was making way too much money and people were playing it way too much.
> >
> >
> > Right, because people leave Halo to spite the developer. It has nothing to do with growing up, getting jobs, getting married, getting mortgages and kids, and just generally moving past gaming as their reason for getting out of bed in the morning.
>
>
> I’m sorry but I disagree with you recon. My friends are all in the mid or late 30’s and 3/4 of them are married and have kids (More then one) The ones that don’t, are with someone (As am I) They all have full times jobs (As do I, actually I run my own business)
>
> They ALL still play video games!! Almost all of them have stopped playing halo because they don’t like how it’s changed so much in a lot of areas. Yet they still play all the other games series from before almost. So getting older has nothing to do with it. Sure, SOME people will stop gaming all together when they get older, but most won’t. Video games are different now then they used to be in the 80’s Video games are now an accepted thing in our culture and is bigger then the movies industry. Yes, you might have less time to play, but if your a real gamer and love video games, your a gamer for life!! I know I am :slight_smile:
>
> Let’s be clear here, I still play video games piles. I’m older then 30 as well. I don’t play as much as when I was 16, but that’s because I have more responsibilities. Not because of any other reason.
>
> I don’t hate Halo 5, not at all in fact… To me it’s a pretty good game, sloppy, but pretty good… but facts and facts here. Halo has lost more and more of it’s players ever since reach. Yes there is more then just one reason here and I’m not saying everyone hates halo now, or anyone that likes Halo 1-3 doesn’t like Halo reach, 4 or 5 either, people do… but the fact remains that halo has lost a lot of players since it drastically changed a variety of things. Again, people getting older plays a very small part in why Halo isn’t as popular as it once was.

You man are awesome telling people that people all ages play Halo and for a reason.

266

> 2533274819567236;3:
> Yeah, Halo needed change. It was making way too much money and people were playing it way too much.

Yes.

267

> 2533274970658419;23:
> > 2533274826434697;22:
> > > 2533274819567236;20:
> > > > 2533274826434697;18:
> > > > > 2533274819567236;15:
> > > > > > 2533274792820475;12:
> > > > > > I don’t understand how people make these threads and take themselves seroosuly. It is an undeniable fact that the halo population in halo 2, halo 3, and even halo reach is far superior than every halo game made by 343i that included all these changes. And no the core fan base getting older is just a lame excuse to try and give 343i a pass. Fact is their games just suck compared to previous halo games. Worse sales numbers, worse population stats… There is literally zero evidence to suggest otherwise.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That’s what seems so crazy to me. Obviously people can like Halo’s current direction, that’s fine, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest Halo wouldn’t have continued on being just about as popular as it was (or maybe slightly less so).
> > > > >
> > > > > There are even a few examples highlighting why it actually would’ve been better off sticking to its roots rather than “modernizing” it like they did. Examples like CoDs success despite sticking with the same basic gameplay and now with Dooms success acting as the perfect parallel to what Halo should’ve done this whole time. There is no reason whatsoever for the drastic changes, all people have are unsupported assumptions.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I can assure you that the majority of players would get bored of Halo 5 over twice as fast had it played like the more successful Halo games.
> > >
> > >
> > > You assure me based on what?
> >
> >
> > The majority of players have played the more successful games not to mention Halo 2 and 3 were defibrillated with MCC not even a year before Halo 5 came out. If Halo 5 felt like a game we had already played the crap out of and have to an extent, gotten bored of, then obviously everyone would lose interest much faster.
> >
> > You want eveidence? Halo MCC had Halo 2 (plus a rejuvinated H2A) and Halo 3, the two most successful games in the series but couldn’t even retain it’s player base as well as Halo 4 did, which is statistically atrocious compared to the three games that came before it.
> >
> > You guys complain about Halo not being like it was back in the day but if it was you sure as hell wouldn’t be playing H5 anymore…
>
>
> You really are crazy if you believe the population of MCC dropped because they didn’t enjoy Halo 2/3. Thanks man, you made my day.
>
> THE GAME WAS BROKEN, AND STILL IS.

True.

268

> 2533274826434697;22:
> > 2533274819567236;20:
> > > 2533274826434697;18:
> > > > 2533274819567236;15:
> > > > > 2533274792820475;12:
> > > > > I don’t understand how people make these threads and take themselves seroosuly. It is an undeniable fact that the halo population in halo 2, halo 3, and even halo reach is far superior than every halo game made by 343i that included all these changes. And no the core fan base getting older is just a lame excuse to try and give 343i a pass. Fact is their games just suck compared to previous halo games. Worse sales numbers, worse population stats… There is literally zero evidence to suggest otherwise.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That’s what seems so crazy to me. Obviously people can like Halo’s current direction, that’s fine, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest Halo wouldn’t have continued on being just about as popular as it was (or maybe slightly less so).
> > > >
> > > > There are even a few examples highlighting why it actually would’ve been better off sticking to its roots rather than “modernizing” it like they did. Examples like CoDs success despite sticking with the same basic gameplay and now with Dooms success acting as the perfect parallel to what Halo should’ve done this whole time. There is no reason whatsoever for the drastic changes, all people have are unsupported assumptions.
> > >
> > >
> > > I can assure you that the majority of players would get bored of Halo 5 over twice as fast had it played like the more successful Halo games.
> >
> >
> > You assure me based on what?
>
>
> The majority of players have played the more successful games not to mention Halo 2 and 3 were defibrillated with MCC not even a year before Halo 5 came out. If Halo 5 felt like a game we had already played the crap out of and have to an extent, gotten bored of, then obviously everyone would lose interest much faster.
>
> You want eveidence? Halo MCC had Halo 2 (plus a rejuvinated H2A) and Halo 3, the two most successful games in the series but couldn’t even retain it’s player base as well as Halo 4 did, which is statistically atrocious compared to the three games that came before it.
>
> You guys complain about Halo not being like it was back in the day but if it was you sure as hell wouldn’t be playing H5 anymore…

Troll.

269

> 2535462360297076;25:
> > 2533274970658419;23:
> > > 2533274826434697;22:
> > > > 2533274819567236;20:
> > > > > 2533274826434697;18:
> > > > > > 2533274819567236;15:
> > > > > > > 2533274792820475;12:
> > > > > > > I don’t understand how people make these threads and take themselves seroosuly. It is an undeniable fact that the halo population in halo 2, halo 3, and even halo reach is far superior than every halo game made by 343i that included all these changes. And no the core fan base getting older is just a lame excuse to try and give 343i a pass. Fact is their games just suck compared to previous halo games. Worse sales numbers, worse population stats… There is literally zero evidence to suggest otherwise.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That’s what seems so crazy to me. Obviously people can like Halo’s current direction, that’s fine, but there is absolutely no evidence to suggest Halo wouldn’t have continued on being just about as popular as it was (or maybe slightly less so).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are even a few examples highlighting why it actually would’ve been better off sticking to its roots rather than “modernizing” it like they did. Examples like CoDs success despite sticking with the same basic gameplay and now with Dooms success acting as the perfect parallel to what Halo should’ve done this whole time. There is no reason whatsoever for the drastic changes, all people have are unsupported assumptions.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I can assure you that the majority of players would get bored of Halo 5 over twice as fast had it played like the more successful Halo games.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > You assure me based on what?
> > >
> > >
> > > The majority of players have played the more successful games not to mention Halo 2 and 3 were defibrillated with MCC not even a year before Halo 5 came out. If Halo 5 felt like a game we had already played the crap out of and have to an extent, gotten bored of, then obviously everyone would lose interest much faster.
> > >
> > > You want eveidence? Halo MCC had Halo 2 (plus a rejuvinated H2A) and Halo 3, the two most successful games in the series but couldn’t even retain it’s player base as well as Halo 4 did, which is statistically atrocious compared to the three games that came before it.
> > >
> > > You guys complain about Halo not being like it was back in the day but if it was you sure as hell wouldn’t be playing H5 anymore…
> >
> >
> > You really are crazy if you believe the population of MCC dropped because they didn’t enjoy Halo 2/3. Thanks man, you made my day.
> >
> > THE GAME WAS BROKEN, AND STILL IS.
>
>
> It is not broken. Just because your internet sucks doesn’t mean others do. Stop hating.

It’s broken, it has been and is still being reported on the forums by players and 343I.
Being a naive does not make you smart. Not a bash but a quote.

270

The problem is that the changes 343 have added to Halo since taking over are old hat. So many other games are doing the same things that it’s just not all that interesting or engaging.

If you’re going to make changes, make it worth it.

271

I love how this argument exists, yet Halo has been changing and changing and only getting less popular. The classic formula never failed. CE-3 were all extremely popular. The series only stated to fall after change happened. Reach was the first strike, then 4, now 5. It’s only been change for the last 6 years! Maybe some consistency is what the series needs? Maybe go back to a formula that we know works?

That wouldn’t make any sense though…

272

Instead of Halo changing how you are playing the game (like how Halo 5 did), it should add to what you are doing in the game. I completely agree that a franchise should not release the same game every cycle, however I believe we all should home in on how it changed instead of just praising any change for the sake of changing. Here’s a real life example:

You have a pizza place that you love to eat at because it holds the one type of pizza no other restaurant could ever outdo. You love this one kind of pizza due to the many factors the restaurant’s cooks and owner put in place to make you want more of it. In addition, it holds sentimental value for you; this was your childhood spot that you visited with friends and enjoyed its unique atmosphere. Over the years, though, you’ve been getting this same exact pizza, a pepperoni pizza (for the sake of simplicity). At some point, you begin to get tired of the same set of ingredients to make the pizza taste the way it does. Surrounding your favorite pizza place, a bunch of Sub sandwich restaurants exist that offer a completely different menu of foods, but you won’t partake at those because you want the pizza that you’ve loved, no matter what. You go up to the owner a couple of times and say that you are getting tired of this same favorite pizza and want something more that will make you come back to eat more. This seems like a simple fix, the cooks can add new ingredients in the pepperoni pizza, more toppings, new spices that really bring out a great flavor, and much more. Instead, the owner, completely changes the restaurant into a Subway, changing the interior design and the menu, entirely. You come back to the restaurant only to find out that it completely changed what you loved about it and replaced it with something different. Yes those subs and the tiled floors can be as good as the pizza and atmosphere you originally came there for, but its not the reason why you’d come to this particular one because there are tons of other sub restaurants available around you. You came to this restaurant for that unique, irreplaceable, and authentic food, but now its gone.

In a sense, this is what 343 Industries has done with the Halo franchise (only in Halo, the original formula didn’t get tired out because Halo Reach changed how you played the game before Halo 3 could even die out on its own). Instead of taking what Halo was always founded on and build upon that, 343 decided to change how Halo was played and what made it unique by rebuilding its latest titles around game mechanics that were already present in other shooters, such as Sprint, Slide, Ground Pound, Spartan Charge, Clamber, Stabilizers, Thrust, etc. In my opinion, Halo Reach, Halo 4, and Halo 5 failed at expanding on the original aspects that made the gameplay great because they all replaced it with something different. Not better, not worse, different. Although 343 has made Halo 5 have well-oiled and fluid gameplay, they should have spent the same time focusing entirely on innovating upon the original Halo formula of Halo’s 1-3 and the Perfect Triangle of “Shoot, Melee, Grenade” by adding new gametypes, Custom Game Browser, new and expansive File Browser, a customizable and individualized File Share for every player, new Multiplayer game modes (such as a space combat one where you have Banshees vs Sabres like in Halo Reach), increasing the power, tools, and range of options in Forge, creating a solid, appealing and immersive User Interface, building a Customization System that empowers the player with Challenges and a goal that will earn them Warzone consumables and Armor, and so much more. The possibilities are endless! (Note: none of those changes drastically alter Halo’s original core gameplay.)

In Halo 3, for example, Bungie added in Equipment into the maps. Yes, this slightly changes the gameplay, but in reality, it adds a new layer of skill, and more strategy in the game. To do this, the only thing Bungie needed to do was focus on their creativity of what Equipment to have and balancing them out. THAT IS IT! They didn’t have to worry about how this piece of equipment factors into the map because the equipment that will be placed on the map will always come AFTER the map is fully designed. A Portable Gravity Lift, for example, doesn’t need to be put on every map because it isn’t necessary to be on every map if it doesn’t fit well or play well on it. This is an example of gameplay additions, not gameplay recreations. From Halo 2 to Halo 3, this Gameplay Addition was an easier, simpler, and creative way to make the gameplay new and fresh, compared to a gameplay recreation that affects many stages of the development process for developers and gaming experiences for the players.

Halo 5’s Warzone mode is another perfect example of adding to what the player is investing their time in doing. Warzone puts you in a new game mode with new objectives, AI and bosses, more players on the teams, etc. It was an addition to what the player could do after they finished the campaign and understand the game’s story. If one were to add a Warzone mode into Halo 3, for example, the developer wouldn’t need to factor in a bunch of complex mechanics in the sandbox to make the concept function. They’d only need to work on the parameters of the game, produce several maps that are bigger than standard BTB maps and that is it! In future installments, 343 can also make even more gametypes and variants with Warzone that expand on more objectives (such as one where you must escort and protect an elephant-like vehicle, or capture-based objectives such as Capture the Flag or Assault).

EDIT: Lastly**, Halo 5, and any Halo with Sprint and Spartan Abilities, restricts itself from many other experiences in the Halo Universe due to Humans and Elites not having the opportunity to be represented in Matchmaking or new modes. Since Halo 5 has Spartan Abilities, Playable Elites will be difficult, nearly impossible, to implement because Elites don’t have abilities as Spartans**. There will never be a true way of working that notion of Elites vs Spartans in Halo 5 because Elites would be misrepresented. And yes, they could have a separate game mode that allows the player to play as Humans or Elites with a different set of mechanics, but that will only divide the community even more with those that like certain modes over others. A game with the original Halo formula across all modes will promote consistency and new modes with different characters.

With additions instead of recreations, 343 Industries are spending less time on reinventing the wheel (or recreating how the game plays) and more valuable time on how the wheel works (how the players are spending their time in the game). The latter will promote a more active community, uniting them to interact with each other in an inviting an friendly manner. This will also sell more copies (increase player populations) and offer all players more options of what to do in a game apart from praising its gameplay, itself. This is why Sprint isn’t needed in a game nowadays. Doom 2016 proved that and still is shaping up to be very successful in the gaming industry, today.

To close, believe it or not, all games need to evolve. BUT game developers, and players alike, should never find the need in focusing on reinventing how the game is played, and instead focus on expanding upon what the player can do in the game. Modify how the wheel works, do NOT reinvent the wheel.

273

> 2533274967316273;263:
> >
>
>
> To close, if 343 fails at creating a simplistic, unique, and easy-to-design game in Halo 6 (one without Sprint), expands on Halo 5’s abilities, and holds a similar list of problems as Halo 5, I’m 99% sure that most of the community won’t analyze the source of those problems, which I believe is Sprint, but the problems, themselves.

Damn that’s a lot to respond to.

The Spartan abilities. Earliest instance I can think of for ground pound is in Titanfall. Besides that and slide, which was probably an early Battlefield game, everything else seems like it came from Halo 4, which came from reach. Camber, Stabilize offer the same function that jet pack did in Reach and Halo 4. Verticality. I don’t really recall seeing Spartan Charge in any other game. Again, seems to me most of these things seem to be natural progression of Reach and 4. I’d argue Ground Pound was only introduced because of the increased verticality. In the same way Assassin’s Creed started offering a simple way to climb down buildings, it’s sort of like a reverse jet pack. Stabilizer for standard heights, clamber to go higher, ground pound to descend. But sure, ground pound was taken from other games, but imo, works well in game, much better than Spartan Charge or slide.

AW and Destiny both came out well after Reach and Halo 4, and we can’t forget that some 343 employees are previous Bungie employees. There’s evidence to suggest that 343 was planning Destiny in 2009, so the copying theory is a bit of a stretch.

You must understand, when you speak about Halo 3, you are talking about a large audience of casual players who really didn’t care about how sprint affects maps or movement is key or the golden triangle or anything like that. The most popular shooter on consoles (and possibly in the world (CS maybe?)) from 2001 to 2007 was Halo. There was a large group of casual gamers who played Halo. The main issue with sprint is that it is a core feature for that casual gamer who prefers to relate to the game they are playing. It’s no secret that CoD MW2 became so popular because it was highly relatable. It was a modern age shooter with a compelling story and real life situations. In both MW1 and MW2, a member of your core team was killed/died by the antagonist. That realistic approach to a shooter is something Halo can never match.

Pretty sure that most Halo players with gamer friends have the anecdote of the one time someone wondered why super soldiers of the future couldn’t sprint. Sprinting is considered a pretty fundamental human instincts, and it’s hard to understand why a battle hardened warrior doesn’t value his instincts. When you speak about sprint, you speak about negative effects on a game that already feels so different than other shooters. Shoot a guy for 1 second in other games, he’s dead. In Halo, you shoot him, he lives, he runs, people can’t relate. Of course sprint messes with the whole shield effect the game has, but it’s essential to get casual players to relate to the game. I mean, new Doom multiplayer has pretty short kill times, and at least feels much less Sci fi than it is.

So now you have no casual gamers, you focus the game to be highly competitive, since your community is focused on body shot and head shot kill times, weapon variation, etc.

The combination of no casual gamers and a rise of shooters to bring your arguably niche market to the surface is huge. The SciFi market used to realistically be Halo and Crysis on consoles. Now, every game coming out is some form of science fictiony shooter. Games that are much simpler and much more relatable than Halo.

I appreciate your belief that Halo can be a dominant force in the market. I hope it can be as well. Except, I can’t ignore all the benefits Halo 3 had when it arrived on consoles, and I can’t see a return to the classic formula converting all the casual gamers to Halo. All games have a fan base. The rest of the game is up to chance, the community that complains about and then buys CoD every year, the casual gamer community. The ones who respond to popular games.

I was looking this up the other day and it seemed interesting to point out. Most Halo games had the same amount of sales within its first month or so. Halo 3 had something like 3.3 million, Halo Reach 3.7 million, Halo 4 had 3.9 or something. Halo 5 has been sitting around 3.5 on Vg Chartz since early December. It seems like that core Halo fanbase is still there. The only thing that’s been changing over the year are the fans that pick up the gamer afterwards, either new fans who buy the games to catch up or the casual gamer. Just an idea.

274

> 2533274848599184;273:
> > 2533274967316273;263:
> > >
> >
> >
> > To close, if 343 fails at creating a simplistic, unique, and easy-to-design game in Halo 6 (one without Sprint), expands on Halo 5’s abilities, and holds a similar list of problems as Halo 5, I’m 99% sure that most of the community won’t analyze the source of those problems, which I believe is Sprint, but the problems, themselves.
>
>
> Damn that’s a lot to respond to.
>
> The Spartan abilities. Earliest instance I can think of for ground pound is in Titanfall. Besides that and slide, which was probably an early Battlefield game, everything else seems like it came from Halo 4, which came from reach…
>
> Pretty sure that most Halo players with gamer friends have the anecdote of the one time someone wondered why super soldiers of the future couldn’t sprint. Sprinting is considered a pretty fundamental human instincts, and it’s hard to understand why a battle hardened warrior doesn’t value his instincts. When you speak about sprint, you speak about negative effects on a game that already feels so different than other shooters. Shoot a guy for 1 second in other games, he’s dead. In Halo, you shoot him, he lives, he runs, people can’t relate. Of course sprint messes with the whole shield effect the game has, but it’s essential to get casual players to relate to the game. I mean, new Doom multiplayer has pretty short kill times, and at least feels much less Sci fi than it is.
>
> I was looking this up the other day and it seemed interesting to point out. Most Halo games had the same amount of sales within its first month or so. Halo 3 had something like 3.3 million, Halo Reach 3.7 million, Halo 4 had 3.9 or something. Halo 5 has been sitting around 3.5 on Vg Chartz since early December. It seems like that core Halo fanbase is still there. The only thing that’s been changing over the year are the fans that pick up the gamer afterwards, either new fans who buy the games to catch up or the casual gamer. Just an idea.

I recommend reading my newest post on this forum. It makes all other factors of population, and trends, etc. less important and directly respond to the main concept of Halo “needing” to change: https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/the-community-can-t-accept-change-but-we-need-it/6018ef7e-b17e-46f0-bb6d-4c5134b3e22d/posts?page=14#post272

Halo, at the end of the day is a video game. Unless you are building a simulator of some sort, you can’t apply realism to a video game due to the fact that it breaks the core components that make a video game a video game. The entire realism or immersion argument for Sprint in Halo doesn’t justify its existence due to the fact that Halo should strive to represent a video game, and specifically an Arena Shooter. Halo was NEVER supposed to be real; and Multiplayer definitely wasn’t supposed to be realistic. If Multiplayer was realistic, then why would Spartans ever fight other Spartans, even when in a UNSC battle simulator? Since that isn’t realistic, the Spartans should fight Elites, instead, because that is realistic. If you wan’t to get REAL, in the lore, Spartans have the ability to sprint at extremely high speeds in short amounts of time compared to how slow Sprint in Halo iterations. Does this mean we must allow them to run 30 mph through maps? No because that completely breaks the game. Or since Spartans are Super Soldiers, why would they die from a shot in the foot? Then, all players must be invulnerable or take less damage from the knee down and the hand… No, that breaks the fundamentals of a video game. Or even, if Spartans are super soldiers, why would they die from walking out of a map and die by the timer? All Spartans should be able to roam around entire worlds, because they are super soldiers, you know. These are crazy examples but they all are supported by this argument. I once asked that same question too, why can’t super soldiers sprint, but I realized that these are video games and that game mechanics are more important than ever will be. Lore compliments Gameplay, not the other way around.

Technically, the only Bungie employer that is still a part of 343 in a viable position is Frank O’ Connor.

Restrictions cause the players to think. They promote creativity in the way players play in matches. Sprint is the easy way to solve the “slowness” in Halo’s gameplay. It is boring, especially due to the fact that so many other games have it. **There are many interesting and creative ways to solve those problems and make a game like Halo 3 work on Warzone-size maps with innovative gameplay additions, like I said in my newest post.**What exactly do you mean by simpler? Realistic? Halo used to be simpler to play and understand but those gameplay and movement restrictions still left so much room for creativity and innovation in gameplay, by the players themselves. If you mean simpler by story, then that would mean the destruction of creates the universe of Halo and makes it immersive and gripping. If you could expand on your idea of other games being more simpler and relatable, it would be helpful for me to understand exactly what you mean. **If Sprint does nothing but affect the gameplay in a negative way, but make it relatable to casuals, then why is it a necessity? Like I’ve said before, the developer can easily say to the community that the game doesn’t need sprint because its designed around one movement system, for example the maps are smaller. That’s it; it won’t be difficult for players to understand.**Regardless of whether 343 directly tried to copy other games when creating Spartan Abilities, or not, are besides the point. If these overlapping abilities are just a coincidence, then Halo 6 should try to deviate as far as it can from CoD, and Destiny (But I have a feeling they’ll try and put in wall running, the new CoD trend, for H6 which would NOT be the best move at all). But to show exactly how Halo copied other games in a few of its gameplay mechanics: Sprint has been in countless shooters for decades now. Thrust was already in a game like Gears of War for years in the form of the roll move. Slide was in Call of Duty: Ghost, which showed off its gameplay all throughout 2013, which was close to the beginning of Halo 5’s development. Clamber was also in Call of Duty as “Mantling” for many iterations throughout the first decade of 2000.

Lastly, the core Halo fan base may still be there, many of them aren’t happy the game they are counting on to give a game that can be played by all with the right type of marketing. Again, look at my latest post where I touch on that some more. After running into many people who bring up important notions, I don’t feel that having no Sprint alone will increase population. But I do believe it will show other shooters that is possible to do it, increase 343’s creativity when it comes to game design, and alleviate the development process to focus more on the many other aspects that make Halo Halo. Instead of using the majority on a topic such as Sprint vs No Sprint, we must directly compare the two major arguments and consider all of their points, examples, etc. The arguments, themselves, not the numbers.
The original formula worked; all casuals and highly skilled players loved it and was for 9 whole years without it actually dying out on its own. However, it was cut short due to unnecessary attempts at reinventing the wheel. I say that we at least give it another shot and see where it goes again.

275

> 2533274967316273;274:
> > 2533274848599184;273:
> > > 2533274967316273;263:
> > > >
>
>
> Halo, at the end of the day is a video game. Unless you are building a simulator of some sort, you can’t apply realism to a video game due to the fact that it breaks the core components that make a video game a video game. The entire realism or immersion argument for Sprint in Halo doesn’t justify its existence due to the fact that Halo should strive to represent a video game, and specifically an Arena Shooter. Halo was NEVER supposed to be real; and Multiplayer definitely wasn’t supposed to be realistic. If Multiplayer was realistic, then why would Spartans ever fight other Spartans, even when in a UNSC battle simulator? Since that isn’t realistic, the Spartans should fight Elites, instead, because that is realistic. If you wan’t to get REAL, in the lore, Spartans have the ability to sprint at extremely high speeds in short amounts of time compared to how slow Sprint in Halo iterations. Does this mean we must allow them to run 30 mph through maps? No because that completely breaks the game. Or since Spartans are Super Soldiers, why would they die from a shot in the foot? Then, all players must be invulnerable or take less damage from the knee down and the hand… No, that breaks the fundamentals of a video game. Or even, if Spartans are super soldiers, why would they die from walking out of a map and die by the timer? All Spartans should be able to roam around entire worlds, because they are super soldiers, you know. These are crazy examples but they all are supported by this argument. I once asked that same question too, why can’t super soldiers sprint, but I realized that these are video games and that game mechanics are more important than ever will be. Lore compliments Gameplay, not the other way around.
>
> Technically, the only Bungie employer that is still a part of 343 in a viable position is Frank O’ Connor.
>
> Restrictions cause the players to think. They promote creativity in the way players play in matches. Sprint is the easy way to solve the “slowness” in Halo’s gameplay. It is boring, especially due to the fact that so many other games have it. **There are many interesting and creative ways to solve those problems and make a game like Halo 3 work on Warzone-size maps with innovative gameplay additions, like I said in my newest post.**What exactly do you mean by simpler? Realistic? Halo used to be simpler to play and understand but those gameplay and movement restrictions still left so much room for creativity and innovation in gameplay, by the players themselves. If you mean simpler by story, then that would mean the destruction of creates the universe of Halo and makes it immersive and gripping. If you could expand on your idea of other games being more simpler and relatable, it would be helpful for me to understand exactly what you mean. **If Sprint does nothing but affect the gameplay in a negative way, but make it relatable to casuals, then why is it a necessity? Like I’ve said before, the developer can easily say to the community that the game doesn’t need sprint because its designed around one movement system, for example the maps are smaller. That’s it; it won’t be difficult for players to understand.**Regardless of whether 343 directly tried to copy other games when creating Spartan Abilities, or not, are besides the point. If these overlapping abilities are just a coincidence, then Halo 6 should try to deviate as far as it can from CoD, and Destiny (But I have a feeling they’ll try and put in wall running, the new CoD trend, for H6 which would NOT be the best move at all). But to show exactly how Halo copied other games in a few of its gameplay mechanics: Sprint has been in countless shooters for decades now. Thrust was already in a game like Gears of War for years in the form of the roll move. Slide was in Call of Duty: Ghost, which showed off its gameplay all throughout 2013, which was close to the beginning of Halo 5’s development. Clamber was also in Call of Duty as “Mantling” for many iterations throughout the first decade of 2000.
>
> Lastly, the core Halo fan base may still be there, many of them aren’t happy the game they are counting on to give a game that can be played by all with the right type of marketing. Again, look at my latest post where I touch on that some more. After running into many people who bring up important notions, I don’t feel that having no Sprint alone will increase population. But I do believe it will show other shooters that is possible to do it, increase 343’s creativity when it comes to game design, and alleviate the development process to focus more on the many other aspects that make Halo Halo. Instead of using the majority on a topic such as Sprint vs No Sprint, we must directly compare the two major arguments and consider all of their points, examples, etc. The arguments, themselves, not the numbers.
> The original formula worked; all casuals and highly skilled players loved it and was for 9 whole years without it actually dying out on its own. However, it was cut short due to unnecessary attempts at reinventing the wheel. I say that we at least give it another shot and see where it goes again.

OK, first off, wtf did I just read? A lot of this is extremely opinionated and shortsighted. Don’t get me wrong, you make valid points in your explanation of your ideas, but you don’t offer viable reasons of why your argument trumps others. Just saying Halo isn’t supposed to be realistic doesn’t create an argument against sprint. Also, Halo was never and never become a Arena Shooter because it eliminates the balancing of the game, (I like Arena Shooters, but Halo should not become one). In Multiplayer we should actually feel like the other Spartans we’re facing aren’t defined by the power of weapons they carry or the power ups they picked up, but by the skill of the Spartans and teamwork that’s incorporated. Halo should not stumble backwards to recreate older multiplayers. Halo should take aspects of them and incorporate them into their own unique style of multiplayer.

I respect your opinion and could see maybe incorporating it in a ODST/Reach-like Halo, (games that centralize around the lore), but if you want to actually have people support and back them, you have to give viable counterpoints to any arguments that could work against your opinions and give positives about your ideas.

276

> OK, first off, wtf did I just read? A lot of this is extremely opinionated and shortsighted. Don’t get me wrong, you make valid points in your explanation of your ideas, but you don’t offer viable reasons of why your argument trumps others. Just saying Halo isn’t supposed to be realistic doesn’t create an argument against sprint. Also, Halo was never and never become a Arena Shooter because it eliminates the balancing of the game, (I like Arena Shooters, but Halo should not become one). In Multiplayer we should actually feel like the other Spartans we’re facing aren’t defined by the power of weapons they carry or the power ups they picked up, but by the skill of the Spartans and teamwork that’s incorporated. Halo should not stumble backwards to recreate older multiplayers.Halo should take aspects of them and incorporate them into their own unique style of multiplayer.

Fair assessment. This time, I’ll give reasons as to why my argument is viable and avoid stating empty claims.

Before we jump the gun, identifying Halo’s original formula as “old:” a game in the form of Counter Strike: Global Offensive is the biggest modern FPS Shooter title, at the moment, by Valve that does not contain “modern” game mechanics such as Sprint, Slide, Wall Running, Dodge moves, etc. However, don’t get misconstrued by saying that CSGO and Halo are anything alike. Under the surface, CSGO is highly complex; originally, Halo is simple. However, during specific time periods (today and in the past, respectively) CSGO and Halo are both successful. Now that this is stated, let’s properly identify Halo and understand that it exists in a genre of a genre of its own.

EDITED: You are right, Halo is not primarily an Arena Shooter. However, Halo isn’t a Squad-based Shooter, either. Arena Shooters are found in current-day games, such as Quake (we’ll return to Quake in a bit). On the other hand, Squad Shooters are found in other games such as the Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six series. In SS, the gameplay is based entirely on team-based attacks, positioning, and defenses. Therefore, TTK is higher to encourage team-shot. In contrast, Arena Shooters such as Quake have low TTKs because it is based more upon individual skill, providing a ‘joust’ kind of gameplay where players traverse throughout small maps and, once they have encountered another player, look for an ‘in’ on another player to effectively kill their opponent.

In regards to Halo, a member of the Halo community, Cursed Lemon, described Halo as a mutated baby of an Arena/Squad Shooter, taking specific mechanics from each genre and creating its own new set of holistic systems that formulate the gameplay, for itself. This is what Halo: Combat Evolved has done. It is important to note: since HCE, Halo has never been realistic and isn’t supposed to be realistic. Halo has always been very fake in the gameplay. However, that is NOT a bad thing. Halo’s uniqueness, success, and overall appeal has always revolved around its simplicity, depth, and, most importantly, possession of a list of mechanics ALL requiring skill. When considering any sport or game, the fact that all of the physical actions require a certain level of skill sets and a player’s skill is clearly discernible, a player’s act of continually returning to the game and getting better or the viewer’s act of watching matches of said game are equally set at an extremely high appeal level. This is key to why Halo’s original (not old) formula was so successful; the game offered the proper depth, in lack of realism, to allow for skill, thus creativity, to form through players’ in-game performance.

In short, Simplicity => Skill requirement => Creativity => Aesthetic Appeal => Popularity => Overall Success.

Now that this is clear, we come back to the notion of Halo becoming more realistic. Off the bat, let the following be known: adding game mechanics to a game, for said game to have mass appeal to new generations or different fan bases, will not accumulate more long-term fans or substantiate previous fans but will simultaneously alienate the original fan base that existed. We know that this is true because of the cataclysmic effect Halo Reach had on populations in the Halo community from 2010, onward, as well as the fact that many of the new players won’t contribute to the community, and will stop playing the game in a couple of weeks. If you look at Halo Reach, the inclusion of Sprint and other Armor Abilities that were intended to make the Spartans feel more Spartan-esque only negatively impacted the original community, made an overall randomness to the gameplay experience, and temporarily invited new consumers that were misinformed on what Reach’s game mechanics did to the original Halo experience. Thus, the overall player populations between Halo 3 and Halo Reach catastrophically plummeted. Next released Halo 4, which continued the trend of realism, and the effects continued. Finally, we have arrived at Halo 5:Guardians. At this approximate moment, Halo officially takes enormous steps away from what set it apart in the market, or what made itself unique.

At first, 343’s decision to implement new features and game mechanics into Halo for it’s 2015 installment seemed like a great inclusion; adding depth while not replacing what was originally special and present. HOWEVER, that concept is not fully true in regards to Halo 5. Yes, in Halo 5, we see much depth. But the new mechanics implemented in Halo 5, Spartan Abilities and Sprint, falsely improve upon the definitive experience of Halo, nor does it fill an empty hole in the gameplay that Halo was, from the HCE. In the end, we have a game that offers shallow, repetitive, and low quality gameplay experiences. All of said statements are objective and can be explained why they are objective in Cursed Lemon’s 26-minute video that differentiates the two concepts of skill and depth while applying it to Halo 5: - YouTube.

In short, the major point from Lemon’s video is that Halo 5’s Spartan Abilities were forms of ‘easy depth’ that were deliberately pre-designed into the game, do not require a high skill level out of the player to perform them, and do not serve as a means of improving upon the original Halo gameplay. Therefore, Spartan Abilities are, obviously, present in Halo 5 not to produce an improved gaming experience than before, increase Halo 5’s competitive appeal for players, or aesthetic appeal for viewers. In reality, Spartan Abilities are present for the sole purpose of offering more ‘stuff’ to make the game appeal to new generations and different fan bases; which isn’t effective due to Halo 5’s dissipating population numbers the further it’s life span progresses (Halo 5 consistently sits in the below the 13th spot XBL games by popularity). For Halo’s sake, if fans ever confidently want to say “WE BACK” again, easy ‘depth,’ or shallow depth (OH the irony), is not what we should be commending 343 Industries for. Since Spartan Abilities allow for so many options to get away from gun fights, Halo 5 has fast movement but doesn’t have fast gameplay-- the latter is what is appealing to players and viewers. Halo 5 only showcases an illusion that gameplay is fast by its Abilities but truly is not fast in gameplay.

If ‘realism’ is what we must accept, then having a great Halo game again is what we must sacrifice. But the first step of avoiding such mistakes is to not call the original Halo formula ‘old.’

277

> 2533274819302824;7:
> That’s such a flawed argument though. Every game in existence has an inflow of new players and an outflow of old players. It’s not a phenomenon unique to Halo and it in itself doesn’t explain Halo’s decline.
>
> Look at my Sig. People bashed the -Yoink- out of the new CoD and I’m sure many of those people being CoD3-CoD4 fans had a significant part in it.

Lol nobody liked CoD 3. Even the developers avoided speaking about it.

278

> You are right, Halo is not primarily an Arena Shooter. However, Halo isn’t a Squad-based Shooter, either. Arena Shooters are found in current-day games, such as Quake (we’ll return to Quake in a bit). On the other hand, Squad Shooters are found in other games such as the Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six series. In SS, the gameplay is based entirely on team-based attacks, positioning, and defenses. Therefore, TTK is very low to encourage team-shot. In contrast, Arena Shooters such as Quake have high TTKs because it is based more upon individual skill, providing a ‘joust’ kind of gameplay where players traverse throughout small maps and, once they have encountered another player, look for an ‘in’ on another player to effectively kill their opponent.

Just wanted to say your point about TTK is completely backwards.

Short TTK’s make it so people don’t have to rely on teamshot. The difference between killing someone in 0.2s and killing them instantly is almost negligible, multiple people don’t have a massive advantage.

With a longer TTTK, say 2s, going up against multiple people means they have a massive advantage because you’re taking an entire 2s to kill just one of them while they’re taking 1s or less to kill you depending on how many of them there are. You look at high level play in Halo 2 and Halo 3 and it’s nothing but Teamshot.

That’s exactly why Ce fans like me call for relatively shorter TTK’s. They don’t force reliance on teamshot and they empower the individual.

Relatively slow killtimes are beneficial for other reasons, like allowing strafe and such to come into play instead of having people just flop dead upon being hit. But they definitely don’t discourage teamshot, they encourage it.

279

> 2533274819302824;278:
> > You are right, Halo is not primarily an Arena Shooter. However, Halo isn’t a Squad-based Shooter, either. Arena Shooters are found in current-day games, such as Quake (we’ll return to Quake in a bit). On the other hand, Squad Shooters are found in other games such as the Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six series. In SS, the gameplay is based entirely on team-based attacks, positioning, and defenses. Therefore, TTK is very low to encourage team-shot. In contrast, Arena Shooters such as Quake have high TTKs because it is based more upon individual skill, providing a ‘joust’ kind of gameplay where players traverse throughout small maps and, once they have encountered another player, look for an ‘in’ on another player to effectively kill their opponent.
>
>
> Just wanted to say your point about TTK is completely backwards.
>
> Short TTK’s make it so people don’t have to rely on teamshot. The difference between killing someone in 0.2s and killing them instantly is almost negligible, multiple people don’t have a massive advantage.
>
> With a longer TTTK, say 2s, going up against multiple people means they have a massive advantage because you’re taking an entire 2s to kill just one of them while they’re taking 1s or less to kill you depending on how many of them there are. You look at high level play in Halo 2 and Halo 3 and it’s nothing but Teamshot.
>
> That’s exactly why Ce fans like me call for relatively shorter TTK’s. They don’t force reliance on teamshot and they empower the individual.
>
> Relatively slow killtimes are beneficial for other reasons, like allowing strafe and such to come into play instead of having people just flop dead upon being hit. But they definitely don’t discourage teamshot, they encourage it.

Sorry, I didn’t proof read it correctly. And thanks for clearing that up. Logically, it just makes more sense, anyways.

I edited it, btw.

280

I love how people pull age demographics from out of nowhere… Please people just stop. Like you guys know who is behind every controller…