> 2533274825830455;3690:
> > 2533274822068856;3687:
> > I feel we’re finally holding a conversation now. In your idea for a revised Clamber, you say “Every ledge would simply have a virtual box surrounding it that lifts the player above the ledge if they land anywhere inside the box.”. I assume you mean the player would have to input a button press to activate this mechanic, yes? Because forcing the player to do so every single time they’re in that virtual box, would take away from their ability to control the character.
>
> Whatever works best. I think there are situations where the player wouldn’t want to climb up the ledge, so it might be that the player would need to hold the jump button to climb.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274822068856;3687:
> > Disabling the ability to throw Grenades for a split second would likely have to happen.
>
> Would it? The worst thing that could happen it would make the transition animation look a bit janky. Mechanically, there is no reason why transporting the player over a ledge would have to interfere with anything but their movement.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274822068856;3687:
> > But what could the possible downsides to this mechanic be? More verticality in map design? Is that necessarily a bad thing on its own?
>
> As I already noted, fans of Clamber might not like the fact that after you have already done a double jumo, you can’t climb up the ledge if you’re still short of completing the jump. Combining it with any variation of Clamber would give players even more jump distance.
>
> The obvious donwsides aare the same as Clamber: more distance to jumps and shorter jumps becoming easier. The problem isn’t the absolute jump distance per se, but its size relative to the player movement speed. Gaps that can’t be jumped require certain amount of space, which puts limits on design of small maps. For example, the design of Coliseum is mostly determined by how large the central gap needs to so that players can’t easily jump from base to base. if you gave players more jump distance without giving them more speed, you’d have to elongate the map and make transit times longer. The alternative is that you don’t care and just allow players to go anywhere, which can make for very chaotic map flow.
Well, as far as animations go, I don’t think a game of Halo’s caliber would be able to get away with a janky animation at this point. And 343 probably doesn’t need more of the sort of criticism it would inevitably attract. People will be angry about the game no matter what, so they don’t need to be given a janky animation that someone can complain about even if they don’t play the game. There’s no need to feed the trolls more that they can feed themselves. Not being able to toss a grenade while pulling yourself up with one hand for half a second, isn’t the worst compromise. It would probably go unnoticed by most the vast majority of the time. My bigger concern is that the established architecture styles may have to be altered. We all know how changing the art design can lead to its own issues, but that’s for another thread.
I think the issue with elongating parts of maps only for Double Jumps, is more doable overall, especially if movement speed is slightly increased. For the sake of all readers, I should put emphasis on the fact that my vision of a Double Jump in Halo would not be a second standard Jump you can make mid-air. It would be a small boost-jump that you can make mid-air, that would at most be the equivalent to half the height of a standard Jump. This is firstly to help keep map design from getting too outlandish for a Halo setting. Secondly, it helps the player get a feel for how heavy the Spartans are. I know, I know, not being able to Double Jump would instill a greater sense of weight, but I don’t think Halo should go full Halo 2/3 for movement. I appreciate new ideas and want to give them a chance if they show potential. This is all hypothetical, anyway. 343 will do what they will do, we all need to remember that.
I totally agree that map flow is important on a fundamental level, which is how I know that, at the very least, Clamber should not stay the same as it is in halo 5. Some people people may not like to hear it, but a certain level of predictability is needed to help with the methodical gameplay that Halo is known for. This isn’t to say there shouldn’t be multiple paths from point A to point B, but reasonably limiting decisions leads to the ability to predict where an enemy could be coming from. It also hastens decision making when it comes to choosing a path, due to the reduced number of pathways you can take to your target destination. Some may call it heresy, but Halo is, in some ways, like Chess. It needs to be carefully balanced. But unlike Chess, there are more dimensions and variables in a video game. Because of this, there is potential for expansion that won’t disrupt the core values of Halo’s gameplay. Off the top of my head, and in no particular order of importance, I believe those values are (but but are not limited to): maintaining momentum in and out of combat, equal starts in multiplayer, and having an atmosphere that isn’t too chaotic, so the player can feel a sense of control over the situation. This last one also has an element of predictability, because you can feel in control when you have a good idea of what will happen. After all, you’re a nearly unstoppable super soldier in the games. In other words: pacing, fairness, mood, and predictability.
I can be included as a half-fan of Clamber, and I think fans would be able to appreciate the change to a Double Jump after playing it. I like the idea and feel of Clamber, but at the same time, I dislike how it effects pacing within active combat. I think that even within Halo 5, it gave the player too much vertical travel distance on top of a standard Jump, which made it too forgiving and shoehorned it into an ability that clearly outclassed an existing mechanic: Crouch Jumping. Don’t get me wrong, Crouch Jumping still had its place in Halo 5, but Clamber gives you a huge height advantage that also forces a slowdown animation that can interfere with the pacing of the gunplay. Another issue that clashes with Halo’s gameplay, is that you have to be facing the ledge you want to Clamber, which means you have to stop shooting anyone that isn’t in front of you, just to prepare yourself to start the animation. When used in combat, it’s a risk vs reward system, but it’s also one that isn’t very fun for the person doing it, because it limits your vertical movement options in combat when you’re near a ledge that can only be Clambered onto. Because of this, I’m now more on board with the Double Jump idea, than a reworked clamber. Some other people have thought about this before, I just had pay closer attention to it, and think about it.