> 2533274972430429;3:
> I hope the game emphasises vehicle travel to get around if it is open world.
You know our motto: “we deliver”
> 2533274798957786;861:
> > 2533274833081329;860:
> > > 2533274798957786;859:
> > > > 2535430289047128;857:
> > > > > 2535468977530447;856:
> > > > > > 2533274815533909;853:
> > > > > > > 2535468977530447;850:
> > > > > > > I wouldn’t get my hopes up. It would be pretty jarring to go from all of the stuff in Halo 5 to how it used to be, which is unfortunate, in my opinion. As much as I want classic game-play, I doubt 343 can actually go back on it, without half of the fan base flipping out at them, except not the classic fans this time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Half might…1/3 might… Next to no one might, they won’t know unless they try. Who knows how many more players might come back too because they did do that. It goes both ways and I’d argue that 343I would gain more then they would loose by a country mile.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2533274936074323;851:
> > > > > > > If it’s more kin to H2A (modern classic) I could see it working since that was 343i first try doing a “classic” style gameplay. But knowing how some parts of the halo community acts if Halo infinite played like H2A they would get pissed. Why? Because some parts of the community thinks Halo 3 gameplay is the only way to classic halo to play. Personally I like H2A over halo 3 just because I find H2A more enjoyable. I like H3 but when 95% of players pick it in MCC I’m forced to play it and not get better since i’m forced to play h3. Overall I’m fine with H5G gameplay if 343i turn it down a bit, but I would like HI to be like H2A if they go classic.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (I don’t hate halo 3 the game just its gameplay)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bold - I must say, I massively disagree here. I think if 343 did this most of the community would be praising them!!! Most Halo 3 fans are fans of H2A, heck I don’t know a single person that isn’t. Again if H6 is like H2A, I think most fans would be loving it!
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with you now. You’re right, they would gain much more than they would lose.
> > > >
> > > > Plus they’ve been honestly outright NEGLECTING classic fans (excluding MCC, which doesn’t count because they’re pre-made games) for almost a decade now… I mean can’t we get SOMETHING by now!?
> > >
> > > How does MCC not count? You can’t get better H3 gameplay than from the game itself. What does the community gain if 343i makes a “new” game that plays exactly like a game they already offer?
> >
> > Who said a classic game would be the exact same game as Halo 3?
> >
> > That’s no different than saying whatever modern game 343i puts out next would play exactly like Halo 4.
>
> How could it be different? More weapons?
Going off H3 since it had more to it then CE and H2. Refine the forge, add AI to it like people have wanted for years, let them build their own campaign minniemissions. Refine the custom games browser with more search options to find what you want while blocking what you don’t IE (search preference duck hunt and all the random modes and exclude the modes that are already in matchmaking). Like others also said, balance things out more when it comes to the weapon sandbox, give the redundant weapons something to not make them redundant, etc etc. You can also improve customization in various ways. There’s a lot you can do to improve off H3 while keeping it’s core gameplay the same. Simply doing change to be new doesn’t work as you alienate people. The issue with Halo has never been that it’s changing, it’s what and how it’s changing that bothers people.
I would’ve loved to see Reach never happen as I would’ve liked to see how far halos original formula would go before serious change was actually needed, instead it pulled a 180 at it’s peak and separated a fanbase. Did Halo “need” to do X Y and z like they did from H3 to reach? We’ll never know as it’s to late to see what could’ve happened had it continued.
> 2533274923562209;882:
> > 2533274798957786;861:
> > > 2533274833081329;860:
> > > > 2533274798957786;859:
> > > > > 2535430289047128;857:
> > > > > > 2535468977530447;856:
> > > > > > > 2533274815533909;853:
> > > > > > > > 2535468977530447;850:
> > > > > > > > I wouldn’t get my hopes up. It would be pretty jarring to go from all of the stuff in Halo 5 to how it used to be, which is unfortunate, in my opinion. As much as I want classic game-play, I doubt 343 can actually go back on it, without half of the fan base flipping out at them, except not the classic fans this time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Half might…1/3 might… Next to no one might, they won’t know unless they try. Who knows how many more players might come back too because they did do that. It goes both ways and I’d argue that 343I would gain more then they would loose by a country mile.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2533274936074323;851:
> > > > > > > > If it’s more kin to H2A (modern classic) I could see it working since that was 343i first try doing a “classic” style gameplay. But knowing how some parts of the halo community acts if Halo infinite played like H2A they would get pissed. Why? Because some parts of the community thinks Halo 3 gameplay is the only way to classic halo to play. Personally I like H2A over halo 3 just because I find H2A more enjoyable. I like H3 but when 95% of players pick it in MCC I’m forced to play it and not get better since i’m forced to play h3. Overall I’m fine with H5G gameplay if 343i turn it down a bit, but I would like HI to be like H2A if they go classic.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > (I don’t hate halo 3 the game just its gameplay)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Bold - I must say, I massively disagree here. I think if 343 did this most of the community would be praising them!!! Most Halo 3 fans are fans of H2A, heck I don’t know a single person that isn’t. Again if H6 is like H2A, I think most fans would be loving it!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree with you now. You’re right, they would gain much more than they would lose.
> > > > >
> > > > > Plus they’ve been honestly outright NEGLECTING classic fans (excluding MCC, which doesn’t count because they’re pre-made games) for almost a decade now… I mean can’t we get SOMETHING by now!?
> > > >
> > > > How does MCC not count? You can’t get better H3 gameplay than from the game itself. What does the community gain if 343i makes a “new” game that plays exactly like a game they already offer?
> > >
> > > Who said a classic game would be the exact same game as Halo 3?
> > >
> > > That’s no different than saying whatever modern game 343i puts out next would play exactly like Halo 4.
> >
> > How could it be different? More weapons?
>
> Going off H3 since it had more to it then CE and H2. Refine the forge, add AI to it like people have wanted for years, let them build their own campaign minniemissions. Refine the custom games browser with more search options to find what you want while blocking what you don’t IE (search preference duck hunt and all the random modes and exclude the modes that are already in matchmaking). Like others also said, balance things out more when it comes to the weapon sandbox, give the redundant weapons something to not make them redundant, etc etc. You can also improve customization in various ways. There’s a lot you can do to improve off H3 while keeping it’s core gameplay the same. Simply doing change to be new doesn’t work as you alienate people. The issue with Halo has never been that it’s changing, it’s what and how it’s changing that bothers people.
>
> I would’ve loved to see Reach never happen as I would’ve liked to see how far halos original formula would go before serious change was actually needed, instead it pulled a 180 at it’s peak and separated a fanbase. Did Halo “need” to do X Y and z like they did from H3 to reach? We’ll never know as it’s to late to see what could’ve happened had it continued.
That’d be what I want from H3 Anniversary. But if Infinite is classic, not only could we get all that… but also a new campaign, possibly an open-world one… with the classic gameplay and vehicle emphasis that everyone loved.
> 2533274802803017;881:
> > 2533274972430429;3:
> > I hope the game emphasises vehicle travel to get around if it is open world.
>
> You know our motto: “we deliver”
“Roger, Cortana. Okay, Charlie Team, Warthog deployed. Saddle up and give 'em hell.”
Well, despite all the altruistic rhetoric, the consensus of 45 pages still suggests that “Classic Movement Mechanics” means “Nothing that was added after Halo 3, except maybe a thing or two from Reach”
I get all the “under the hood” things that need to be addressed because we were stuck with them due to the prevailing technology of each prior release.
> 2535473481267884;866:
> You literally have no clue about gameplay.
> People (the ones you try to attack / make fun of in your posts) don’t want “another H3” (like you stated in countless posts). A lot of people would appreciate a new game, heavily focussed on the run & gun formular, a one-gear movement system w. improvements.
> How it could be different? Have you ever heard something about weapon sandbox improvements? Maps? Campaign, Multiplayer designed around a one gear movement system? Balancing? Vehicles? Balanced Dual Wielding? Theater? Physics / Environment? Soundtracks? Improve forge? Gamemodes? Projectile / Hitscan? Vehicles? Customization? Matchmaking / Servers? Improved map pick ups? Improved graphics? And tons of other stuff.
> But I don’t expect you to understand anything of this anyway. People like to ignore every argument, every post, every feedback to make another “hehehe, u ppl want another Halo 3, hehehe” joke, because they are not able to discuss.
Some of that has to do with movement, a lot of it doesn’t. This topic is about Classic Movement Mechanics, and that generally means Movement Mechanics only present in Halo CE thru 3. I understand that no one wants Halo 3 back because it’s available now and clearly no one wants to play it. People wanted a Halo 3 Anniversary because Halo CE got one and Halo 2 got one, but the first two got upgrades and tweaks so that they could run on modern equipment and look as good as modern games. Halo 3 was already there and needs nothing to have it hang with current games. So, while the rhetoric seems to suggest that “Classic” means Halo 3 with polish, in reality it means Halo with No Gimmicks.
To me this means that Master Chief, an original Spartan II, should not be able to sprint, or clamber, or slide, or use a thruster pack, or charge. He’s just a Marine, only bigger. All those simple mechanics that he was stuck with because there was no technical way to have him move as a Spartan should now, technical capability or not, be the limits of his capabilities, fusion-powered suit notwithstanding. 343’s brand-spanking new engine, the most powerful yet, should have Master Chief running around with no more capability than he had in CE when even dual-wielding was impossible.
Here’s the thing. If you read any of the literature that accompanies the game you will learn that Spartans have all sorts of capabilities that were not necessarily able to be simulated in the older games. You are aware of the capabilities, and you would like to have those abilities when playing the game. In the newest, latest, most powerful Halo game ever created I would like to play as the Spartans I know to exist, not as a Spartan only suitable for playing esports.
It’s true that from the moment 343i took over they tend to shove their changes in our faces. I think that is what ultimately annoyed most people. In fact, I believe when Halo 4 released I commented in these forums that 343i’s changes should have been more… subtle. I believe they ought to shelve any whacky new abilities they think “casuals” might enjoy, and just drop that line of thinking altogether. No one wants “stuff” in the game because it’s possible to have it in the game. No one. I don’t know who can argue with having a Spartan that can move and fight like a Spartan. The purpose of armor is to protect its occupant. Armor Abilities should primarily be oriented towards keeping the Spartan alive, in contact with their team, and supplied with tactical information. In fact, Armor Abilities should have little or nothing to do with player movement mechanics. Spartan Abilities should be nothing but movement mechanics. Movement mechanics befitting a Spartan.
> 2533274798957786;885:
> Well, despite all the altruistic rhetoric, the consensus of 45 pages still suggests that “Classic Movement Mechanics” means “Nothing that was added after Halo 3, except maybe a thing or two from Reach”
Going back through the last 5 pages (because I don’t really want to go through all 45, and I doubt you did either), the consensus leans more towards an argument of “get rid of bad stuff in Halo 5” instead of “make things exactly like Halo 3.”
No one said “don’t add anything after Halo 3”, just don’t add the stuff after Halo 3 that people clearly didn’t like.
> 2533274798957786;885:
> To me this means that Master Chief, an original Spartan II, should not be able to sprint, or clamber, or slide, or use a thruster pack, or charge. He’s just a Marine, only bigger. All those simple mechanics that he was stuck with because there was no technical way to have him move as a Spartan should now, technical capability or not, be the limits of his capabilities, fusion-powered suit notwithstanding. 343’s brand-spanking new engine, the most powerful yet, should have Master Chief running around with no more capability than he had in CE when even dual-wielding was impossible.
>
> Here’s the thing. If you read any of the literature that accompanies the game you will learn that Spartans have all sorts of capabilities that were not necessarily able to be simulated in the older games. You are aware of the capabilities, and you would like to have those abilities when playing the game. In the newest, latest, most powerful Halo game ever created I would like to play as the Spartans I know to exist, not as a Spartan only suitable for playing esports.
To this end, you will almost never be able to make Master Chief play exactly like the literature because of the simple fact that this is a game and things are done for gameplay balance. Not everything in the game is because “Spartans can do it in real life” and it really shouldn’t be that way, or else you’d make an overcomplicated game and there aren’t enough buttons on the controller to simulate “real life”. And by real life, I mean “Halo’s Universe life”, because Spartans were capable of dodging a bullet or two, yet were also weak enough where the right Brute or Elite at the right time can completely eviscerate a Spartan-II, including Chief.
It’s why we can’t swim in the games despite Spartans known to escape by swimming.
It’s why we lost the ability to dual wield when it’s as “simple” as picking up a weapon with your other hand and shooting it.
Spartans were capable of locking their armor, yet we got rid of Armor Lock back in Reach.
You’re trying to argue a change in gameplay for reasons other than the gameplay it’s affecting in the first place.
> 2533274833081329;886:
> > 2533274798957786;885:
> > Well, despite all the altruistic rhetoric, the consensus of 45 pages still suggests that “Classic Movement Mechanics” means “Nothing that was added after Halo 3, except maybe a thing or two from Reach”
>
> Going back through the last 5 pages (because I don’t really want to go through all 45, and I doubt you did either), the consensus leans more towards an argument of “get rid of bad stuff in Halo 5” instead of “make things exactly like Halo 3.”
>
> No one said “don’t add anything after Halo 3”, just don’t add the stuff after Halo 3 that people clearly didn’t like.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274798957786;885:
> > To me this means that Master Chief, an original Spartan II, should not be able to sprint, or clamber, or slide, or use a thruster pack, or charge. He’s just a Marine, only bigger. All those simple mechanics that he was stuck with because there was no technical way to have him move as a Spartan should now, technical capability or not, be the limits of his capabilities, fusion-powered suit notwithstanding. 343’s brand-spanking new engine, the most powerful yet, should have Master Chief running around with no more capability than he had in CE when even dual-wielding was impossible.
> >
> > Here’s the thing. If you read any of the literature that accompanies the game you will learn that Spartans have all sorts of capabilities that were not necessarily able to be simulated in the older games. You are aware of the capabilities, and you would like to have those abilities when playing the game. In the newest, latest, most powerful Halo game ever created I would like to play as the Spartans I know to exist, not as a Spartan only suitable for playing esports.
>
> To this end, you will almost never be able to make Master Chief play anything like the literature because of the simple fact that this is a game and things are done for gameplay balance. Not everything in the game is because “Spartans can do it in real life” and it really shouldn’t be that way, or else you’d make an overcomplicated game and there aren’t enough buttons on the controller to simulate “real life”. And by real life, I mean “Halo’s Universe life”, because Spartans were capable of dodging a bullet or two, yet were also weak enough where the right Brute or Elite at the right time can completely eviscerate a Spartan-II, including Chief.
>
> It’s why we can’t swim in the games despite Spartans known to escape by swimming.
>
> It’s why we lost the ability to dual wield when it’s as “simple” as picking up a weapon with your other hand and shooting it.
>
> Spartans were capable of locking their armor, yet we got rid of Armor Lock back in Reach.
>
> You’re trying to argue a change in gameplay for reasons other than the gameplay it’s affecting in the first place.
And you are trying to say I’m arguing for a change in gameplay. I am not. I’m not looking for any “real-life” mechanics in a video game of a fictional universe. The literature describes how Spartans function, and I believe this new engine 343 is hyping can give us the Spartans we know to exist. Those Spartans can clamber. Those Spartans can sprint. Those Spartans can swim. Halo 3 Spartans cannot. I don’t want Halo compared to CoD any longer. Halo Spartans are enhanced super soldiers wearing fusion-powered armor. CoD soldiers are warmed-over WWII normal humans. The gameplay should NOT be the SAME. Spartans should NOT be NERFED so they play like CoD characters. Especially so that they then become compatible with esports. No sir. Halo games should have Halo characters that have capabilities that have been established everywhere else in the franchise except the multiplayer game. Halo does not need to meet the terms of other games to be relevant. If they want, other games can try to meet Halo’s standard.
Dual wielding and Armor Lock could come back. They don’t have to work the exact same way they did in the older games. You can have dual wielding that doesn’t mess with the weapon balance. You can have Armor Lock that doesn’t make you invulnerable. Nothing was intrinsically wrong with those mechanics (which are NOT movement mechanics, by the way), just the implementation.
It’s not a matter of over-complication. Most of the capabilities a Spartan should possess have already been implemented in one game or another. Certainly not successfully, but nothing that has been implemented should make their new engine chug. If they have something they want to add, they should reconsider. Their propensity is to add abilities that make for interesting montages and don’t necessarily provide any tactical or strategic capability, and that’s an urge they should resist. They think they’re doing “casuals” a favor. If they want to do “casuals” a favor they should cut that crap out. Stop thinking of us as “different” Halo players that want stupid stuff. No one ever asked for that stuff, casual or otherwise. 343i just does it and it ends up -Yoink!- everyone off, including the people they thought they were appeasing.
Just stop it, 343. Spartan Abilities and Armor Abilities should all have clear strategic and/or tactical military usefulness. Halo players add the cool factor.
For the record, I did, indeed, read all 45 pages before responding. Not every post was as wordy as mine. It didn’t take long.
Just not adding the things after Halo 3 that people clearly didn’t like pretty much means everything added after Halo 3. Waypoint’s first game thread was Reach, and I was here the week it opened. The general argument then, as now, was about what Reach “did to Halo.” Then it was what Halo 4 “did to Halo.” Now it’s what Halo 5 is “doing to Halo.” When I say there is no consensus of anything “good” that happened to Halo after Halo 3, that is exactly what I mean. There is nothing everyone likes that happened after Halo 3 when the subject is movement mechanics. The discussion of movement mechanics usually becomes an esports discussion, which is then usually dominated by an assertion that esports is Halo. Then it becomes “us” versus “them”. Well, when Halo CE launched there was only one kind of Halo player. That is the “root” that we need to get back to.
> 2533274798957786;887:
> > 2533274833081329;886:
> > > 2533274798957786;885:
> > > Well, despite all the altruistic rhetoric, the consensus of 45 pages still suggests that “Classic Movement Mechanics” means “Nothing that was added after Halo 3, except maybe a thing or two from Reach”
> >
> > Going back through the last 5 pages (because I don’t really want to go through all 45, and I doubt you did either), the consensus leans more towards an argument of “get rid of bad stuff in Halo 5” instead of “make things exactly like Halo 3.”
> >
> > No one said “don’t add anything after Halo 3”, just don’t add the stuff after Halo 3 that people clearly didn’t like.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533274798957786;885:
> > > To me this means that Master Chief, an original Spartan II, should not be able to sprint, or clamber, or slide, or use a thruster pack, or charge. He’s just a Marine, only bigger. All those simple mechanics that he was stuck with because there was no technical way to have him move as a Spartan should now, technical capability or not, be the limits of his capabilities, fusion-powered suit notwithstanding. 343’s brand-spanking new engine, the most powerful yet, should have Master Chief running around with no more capability than he had in CE when even dual-wielding was impossible.
> > >
> > > Here’s the thing. If you read any of the literature that accompanies the game you will learn that Spartans have all sorts of capabilities that were not necessarily able to be simulated in the older games. You are aware of the capabilities, and you would like to have those abilities when playing the game. In the newest, latest, most powerful Halo game ever created I would like to play as the Spartans I know to exist, not as a Spartan only suitable for playing esports.
> >
> > To this end, you will almost never be able to make Master Chief play anything like the literature because of the simple fact that this is a game and things are done for gameplay balance. Not everything in the game is because “Spartans can do it in real life” and it really shouldn’t be that way, or else you’d make an overcomplicated game and there aren’t enough buttons on the controller to simulate “real life”. And by real life, I mean “Halo’s Universe life”, because Spartans were capable of dodging a bullet or two, yet were also weak enough where the right Brute or Elite at the right time can completely eviscerate a Spartan-II, including Chief.
> >
> > It’s why we can’t swim in the games despite Spartans known to escape by swimming.
> >
> > It’s why we lost the ability to dual wield when it’s as “simple” as picking up a weapon with your other hand and shooting it.
> >
> > Spartans were capable of locking their armor, yet we got rid of Armor Lock back in Reach.
> >
> > You’re trying to argue a change in gameplay for reasons other than the gameplay it’s affecting in the first place.
>
> And you are trying to say I’m arguing for a change in gameplay. I am not. I’m not looking for any “real-life” mechanics in a video game of a fictional universe. The literature describes how Spartans function, and I believe this new engine 343 is hyping can give us the Spartans we know to exist. Those Spartans can clamber. Those Spartans can sprint. Those Spartans can swim. Halo 3 Spartans cannot. I don’t want Halo compared to CoD any longer. Halo Spartans are enhanced super soldiers wearing fusion-powered armor. CoD soldiers are warmed-over WWII normal humans. The gameplay should NOT be the SAME. Spartans should NOT be NERFED so they play like CoD characters. Especially so that they then become compatible with esports. No sir. Halo games should have Halo characters that have capabilities that have been established everywhere else in the franchise except the multiplayer game. Halo does not need to meet the terms of other games to be relevant. If they want, other games can try to meet Halo’s standard.
>
> Dual wielding and Armor Lock could come back. They don’t have to work the exact same way they did in the older games. You can have dual wielding that doesn’t mess with the weapon balance. You can have Armor Lock that doesn’t make you invulnerable. Nothing was intrinsically wrong with those mechanics (which are NOT movement mechanics, by the way), just the implementation.
>
> It’s not a matter of over-complication. Most of the capabilities a Spartan should possess have already been implemented in one game or another. Certainly not successfully, but nothing that has been implemented should make their new engine chug. If they have something they want to add, they should reconsider. Their propensity is to add abilities that make for interesting montages and don’t necessarily provide any tactical or strategic capability, and that’s an urge they should resist. They think they’re doing “casuals” a favor. If they want to do “casuals” a favor they should cut that crap out. Stop thinking of us as “different” Halo players that want stupid stuff. No one ever asked for that stuff, casual or otherwise. 343i just does it and it ends up -Yoink!- everyone off, including the people they thought they were appeasing.
>
> Just stop it, 343. Spartan Abilities and Armor Abilities should all have clear strategic and/or tactical military usefulness. Halo players add the cool factor.
>
> For the record, I did, indeed, read all 45 pages before responding. Not every post was as wordy as mine. It didn’t take long.
>
> Just not adding the things after Halo 3 that people clearly didn’t like pretty much means everything added after Halo 3. Waypoint’s first game thread was Reach, and I was here the week it opened. The general argument then, as now, was about what Reach “did to Halo.” Then it was what Halo 4 “did to Halo.” Now it’s what Halo 5 is “doing to Halo.” When I say there is no consensus of anything “good” that happened to Halo after Halo 3, that is exactly what I mean. There is nothing everyone likes that happened after Halo 3 when the subject is movement mechanics. The discussion of movement mechanics usually becomes an esports discussion, which is then usually dominated by an assertion that esports is Halo. Then it becomes “us” versus “them”. Well, when Halo CE launched there was only one kind of Halo player. That is the “root” that we need to get back to.
At this moment, 343i didn’t really hype us for anything other than “new engine.” We really don’t even know what kind of game Infinite is going to be yet.
A new engine doesn’t necessarily mean there is a magic answer to Dual Wielding we’ve never seen before, or Armor Lock. A new engine is still playing a game, and that game has things done for gameplay’s sake, even down to the very simple mechanics like jump height or movement speed, or how much damage you take or deal for every given input.
Halo was never compared to Call of Duty until Call of Duty became popular, and even then it was mostly the games themselves, not the characters in the games and their abilities. I mean, all someone has to do is mention how Spartans can flip a tank with the press of a button (in-game, not necessarily the story) and that argument goes out the window.
Bungie’s website was around and people had hate to throw at the earlier games as well. I mean a whole separate website was created because of the mistakes of Halo 2. So it’s really more “What Halo 2 did to Halo”, “What Halo 3 did to Halo”, and then so on. Every game, whether Bungie or 343i-made, had good and bad in their games.
<p><p><blockquote class=“box-quote” data-username=“Vegeto30294” data-postid=“888”></p></p>
<p><p><p>At this moment, 343i didn’t really hype us for anything other than “new engine.” We really don’t even know what kind of game <em>Infinite</em> is going to be yet.</p></p></p>
<p><p></blockquote></p></p>
<p><p><p>But we do know it will be an FPS, that it takes place after Halo 5, and it will have Master Chief. That is why we are discussing movement mechanics. We wouldn’t discuss that if Infinite was going to be an RTS game.</p></p></p>
<p><p><blockquote class=“box-quote” data-username=“Vegeto30294” data-postid=“888”></p></p>
<p><p><p>A new engine doesn’t necessarily mean there is a magic answer to Dual Wielding we’ve never seen before, or Armor Lock. A new engine is still playing a game, and that game has things done for gameplay’s sake, even down to the very simple mechanics like jump height or movement speed, or how much damage you take or deal for every given input.</p></p></p>
<p><p></blockquote></p></p>
<p><p><p>Every game engine written for Halo after the original one was written specifically to get around and/or go beyond the limitations of the previous engine and console. Their answer to dual wielding wouldn’t have to be “magic” if they wrote code to specifically address it. Doing (or not doing) things these days for the sake of gameplay is not the excuse it used to be. It is not far-fetched to assume that a new engine will allow what was impossible earlier. 343i is clearly dying to show us how much better their new engine is, and I don’t think all their efforts were just to give us better graphics. I expect Spartans should be able to <em>triple</em> wield. How? I don’t know. I haven’t seen the code.</p></p></p>
<p><p><blockquote class=“box-quote” data-username=“Vegeto30294” data-postid=“888”></p></p>
<p><p><p>Halo was never compared to Call of Duty until Call of Duty became popular, and even then it was mostly the games themselves, not the characters in the games and their abilities. I mean, all someone has to do is mention how Spartans can flip a tank with the press of a button (in-game, not necessarily the story) and that argument goes out the window.</p></p></p>
<p><p></blockquote></p></p>
<p><p><p>That’s because CoD has no character. I believe it was initially the CoD players that compared their game to Halo, and mocked us because their game was in MLG and ours wasn’t. Apparently, in order to get Halo into MLG some of the meager Spartan Abilities we had needed to be nerfed, such as jump height and player speed (I don’t know what exactly had to change, only that my response to the changes were, “then that’s not Halo”).</p></p></p>
<p><p><blockquote class=“box-quote” data-username=“Vegeto30294” data-postid=“888”></p></p>
<p><p><p>Bungie’s website was around and people had hate to throw at the earlier games as well. I mean a whole separate website was created because of the mistakes of Halo 2. So it’s really more “What Halo 2 did to Halo”, “What Halo 3 did to Halo”, and then so on. Every game, whether Bungie or 343i-made, had good and bad in their games.</p></p></p>
<p><p></blockquote></p></p>
<p><p><p>Yes, Halo2Sucks.com got a lot of attention for a few months. People got good playing CE and Halo 2 hurt their game, just as Halo 3 hurt players that got good playing 2, and Reach hurt players that got good in 3, and so on ad nauseum. Every game had good and bad. The good every game has is the advances that could be taken advantage of with new code and/or a new console. The bad is always that the new stuff makes your achievements in the previous game moot. This is why the most serious pushback comes from Halo 3. There were a LOT of people that “got good” in Halo 2’s online multiplayer (that’s where it all started. Online multiplayer was a PC thing until Halo) and Halo 3 chucked all that out the window with new mechanics and a new online multiplayer experience. And a new ranking system. Halo 2 players wanted to stay on top and others saw their chance to catch up and maybe surpass. That may have been all right except people that had high-ranking accounts found out they could sell them, thus making it possible for anyone to be a “50”. There may have been arguments about who did or did not deserve their “rank”, but there was little real discussion about movement mechanics. Not until Reach.</p></p></p>
<p><p><p></p></p></p>
<p><p><p>People will go on and on about what Reach did with movement mechanics, but there was another thing a significant segment of the community was upset about. Microsoft made Bungie change their ranking system to reflect time played as opposed to “skill level”, because all the account selling was screwing up Microsoft’s “TrueSkill” algorithm. All the rather significant changes to movement mechanics that were implemented in first Halo 2 and then Halo 3 (both games that issued “skill based rank”) were largely tolerated. No skill rank in Reach and all of a sudden the movement mechanics were the reason to hate Reach. Reach’s mechanics were <em>deliberately</em> unlike Halo 2 and 3. Your character was a Spartan III. The game itself was a spinoff, like ODST. Didn’t matter. I believe now as I believed back then that if Reach gave out rank the way Halo 3 did no one would have cared what kind of mechanics the game had. The same is true for Halo 4 and Halo 5. No skill based rank? The game sucks. The only thing “good” about Halo 5 is that it is now a gateway to glory if you can get into an HCS tournament. The tournament stuff is ok, otherwise the game sucks. Tournament players can get cash prizes. Everyone else gets The Yappening.</p></p></p>
<p><p><p></p></p></p>
<p><p><p>Through it all, BTB remains the most popular thing online. Not Team Slayer. Big Team Battle. The most ignored stat in the franchise.</p></p></p>
<p><p><p></p></p></p>
<p><p><p>Hype that tournament play, 343i. Not that many people participate, but if it’s not there Halo will die.</p></p></p>
I have no idea what just happened
> 2533274833081329;888:
> At this moment, 343i didn’t really hype us for anything other than “new engine.” We really don’t even know what kind of game Infinite is going to be yet.
But we do know it will be an FPS, that it takes place after Halo 5, and it will have Master Chief. That is why we are discussing movement mechanics. We wouldn’t discuss that if Infinite was going to be an RTS game.
> A new engine doesn’t necessarily mean there is a magic answer to Dual Wielding we’ve never seen before, or Armor Lock. A new engine is still playing a game, and that game has things done for gameplay’s sake, even down to the very simple mechanics like jump height or movement speed, or how much damage you take or deal for every given input.
Every game engine written for Halo after the original one was written specifically to get around and/or go beyond the limitations of the previous engine and console. Their answer to dual wielding wouldn’t have to be “magic” if they wrote code to specifically address it. Doing (or not doing) things these days for the sake of gameplay is not the excuse it used to be. It is not far-fetched to assume that a new engine will allow what was impossible earlier. 343i is clearly dying to show us how much better their new engine is, and I don’t think all their efforts were just to give us better graphics. I expect Spartans should be able to triple wield. How? I don’t know. I haven’t seen the code.
> Halo was never compared to Call of Duty until Call of Duty became popular, and even then it was mostly the games themselves, not the characters in the games and their abilities. I mean, all someone has to do is mention how Spartans can flip a tank with the press of a button (in-game, not necessarily the story) and that argument goes out the window.
That’s because CoD has no character. I believe it was initially the CoD players that compared their game to Halo, and mocked us because their game was in MLG and ours wasn’t. Apparently, in order to get Halo into MLG some of the meager Spartan Abilities we had needed to be nerfed, such as jump height and player speed (I don’t know what exactly had to change, only that my response to the changes were, “then that’s not Halo”).
> Bungie’s website was around and people had hate to throw at the earlier games as well. I mean a whole separate website was created because of the mistakes of Halo 2. So it’s really more “What Halo 2 did to Halo”, “What Halo 3 did to Halo”, and then so on. Every game, whether Bungie or 343i-made, had good and bad in their games.
Yes, Halo2Sucks.com got a lot of attention for a few months. People got good playing CE and Halo 2 hurt their game, just as Halo 3 hurt players that got good playing 2, and Reach hurt players that got good in 3, and so on ad nauseum. Every game had good and bad. The “good” every game has is the advances that could be taken advantage of with new code and/or a new console. The “bad” is always that the new stuff makes your achievements in the previous game moot. This is why the most serious pushback comes from Halo 3. There were a LOT of people that “got good” in Halo 2’s online multiplayer (that’s where it all started. Online multiplayer was a PC thing until Halo) and Halo 3 chucked all that out the window with new mechanics and a new online multiplayer experience. And a new ranking system. Halo 2 players wanted to stay on top and others saw their chance to catch up and maybe surpass. That may have been all right except people that had high-ranking accounts found out they could sell them, thus making it possible for anyone to be a “50”. There may have been arguments about who did or did not deserve their “rank”, but there was little real discussion about movement mechanics. Not until Reach.
People will go on and on about what Reach did with movement mechanics, but there was another thing a significant segment of the community was upset about. Microsoft made Bungie change their ranking system to reflect time played as opposed to “skill level”, because all the account selling was screwing up Microsoft’s “TrueSkill” algorithm. All the rather significant changes to movement mechanics that were implemented in first Halo 2 and then Halo 3 (both games that issued “skill based rank”) were largely tolerated. No skill rank in Reach and all of a sudden the movement mechanics were the reason to hate it. Reach’s mechanics were deliberately unlike Halo 2 and 3. Your character was a Spartan III. The game itself was a spinoff, like ODST. Didn’t matter. I believe now as I believed back then that if Reach gave out rank the way Halo 3 did no one would have cared what kind of mechanics the game had. The same is true for Halo 4 and Halo 5. No skill based rank? The game sucks. The only thing “good” about Halo 5 is that it is now a gateway to glory if you can get into an HCS tournament. The tournament stuff is ok, otherwise the game sucks. Tournament players can get cash prizes. Everyone else gets The Yappening.
Hype that tournament play, 343i. Not that many people participate, but if it’s not there Halo will die.
> 2533274798957786;885:
> To me this means that Master Chief, an original Spartan II, should not be able to sprint, or clamber, or slide, or use a thruster pack, or charge. He’s just a Marine, only bigger. All those simple mechanics that he was stuck with because there was no technical way to have him move as a Spartan should now, technical capability or not, be the limits of his capabilities, fusion-powered suit notwithstanding.
> 2533274798957786;887:
> The literature describes how Spartans function, and I believe this new engine 343 is hyping can give us the Spartans we know to exist. Those Spartans can clamber. Those Spartans can sprint. Those Spartans can swim. Halo 3 Spartans cannot. I don’t want Halo compared to CoD any longer. Halo Spartans are enhanced super soldiers wearing fusion-powered armor. CoD soldiers are warmed-over WWII normal humans. The gameplay should NOT be the SAME. Spartans should NOT be NERFED so they play like CoD characters. Especially so that they then become compatible with esports. No sir. Halo games should have Halo characters that have capabilities that have been established everywhere else in the franchise except the multiplayer game. Halo does not need to meet the terms of other games to be relevant. If they want, other games can try to meet Halo’s standard.
Being able to run and shoot simultaneously is not limiting. Not being able to do that - as we have been for two to three-ish games by now - on the other hand is.
It is also what Spartans have been shown to be able to do in lore. Repeatedly. Even in 343’s own releases.
If Spartans should finally act their part and no longer “play like CoD characters”, then sprint should be the first mechanic to go down the drain.
EDIT: Btw, we also know for a fact that sprint is in the games, not because Spartans can do it or because it makes sense for the lore or not even because it’s good for the gameplay, but A) because real-life soldiers do it and the mechanics are based on that and B) because other games have it. Josh Holmes confirmed the former (“To achieve an immersive experience, we first ground our portrayal of actions in what it feels like to be a human being in our world (that’s the common lens that we all use as reference) and then we adapt those actions to reflect what it would be like to be a kick–Yoink- Spartan wrapped in Mjolnir assault armor.”) while the latter was reveiled at GDC.
> 2535449076192416;1:
> In my opinion, this game has a really high chance of bringing back the classic gameplay so many old Halo fans have adored! I am so pumped for this!
>
> EDIT: Wow, I didn’t expect such diverse opinions on this subject. The Halo community really is split in half. I’m sorry you have to deal with us, 343 
>
> EDIT: 800 comments. What have I done?
I wouldn’t mind if Halo went back to old times I liked it better then. I would be happy if sprints gone . But if they don’t have remove it I’m pretty sure there is a way we can please both sides of the community. Ground pound and the speed boost gotta go. Return of the Halo 2 or Halo 3 BR style would be great. Maybe make movement speed higher by default like MLG instead of Sprint. That would make strafing better and probably more rewarding. I would also like the BR as a competitive weapon not the pistol like in HCS. Maybe BR and assault rifle as starting weapons.
> 2533274798957786;891:
> > 2533274833081329;888:
> > At this moment, 343i didn’t really hype us for anything other than “new engine.” We really don’t even know what kind of game Infinite is going to be yet.
>
> But we do know it will be an FPS, that it takes place after Halo 5, and it will have Master Chief. That is why we are discussing movement mechanics. We wouldn’t discuss that if Infinite was going to be an RTS game.
>
>
> > People will go on and on about what Reach did with movement mechanics, but there was another thing a significant segment of the community was upset about. Microsoft made Bungie change their ranking system to reflect time played as opposed to “skill level”, because all the account selling was screwing up Microsoft’s “TrueSkill” algorithm. All the rather significant changes to movement mechanics that were implemented in first Halo 2 and then Halo 3 (both games that issued “skill based rank”) were largely tolerated. No skill rank in Reach and all of a sudden the movement mechanics were the reason to hate it. Reach’s mechanics were deliberately unlike Halo 2 and 3. Your character was a Spartan III. The game itself was a spinoff, like ODST. Didn’t matter. I believe now as I believed back then that if Reach gave out rank the way Halo 3 did no one would have cared what kind of mechanics the game had. The same is true for Halo 4 and Halo 5. No skill based rank? The game sucks. The only thing “good” about Halo 5 is that it is now a gateway to glory if you can get into an HCS tournament. The tournament stuff is ok, otherwise the game sucks. Tournament players can get cash prizes. Everyone else gets The Yappening.
> >
> > Hype that tournament play, 343i. Not that many people participate, but if it’s not there Halo will die.
Bold - I don’t recall Microsoft forcing bungie to do that. Have a link to that? I remember bungie just deciding to make the change in favor of there new ranking system that failed miserably by the way. Also, people talk like everyone and there brother we’re selling there accounts in halo 3, when in reality it was a VERY small percentage of people. Who cares if people were. It doesn’t affect the game in anyway. If you were dumb enough to buy someone’s account that’s on you. Any game that becomes insanely popular is always going to have stuff like this. Where someone is willing to spend real money to have that special outfit, or weapon or rank or whatever. It happens quite often.
What are you talking about here?
> significant changes to movement mechanics that were implemented in first Halo 2 and then Halo 3
You make it sound like Halo 2 movement mechanics are different then Halo 3. Maybe they are SLIGHTLY, but nothing to write home about.
> No skill rank in Reach and all of a sudden the movement mechanics were the reason to hate it. Reach’s mechanics were deliberately unlike Halo 2 and 3. Your character was a Spartan III. The game itself was a spinoff, like ODST. Didn’t matter. I believe now as I believed back then that if Reach gave out rank the way Halo 3 did no one would have cared what kind of mechanics the game had
The movement mechanics wasn’t the issue in reach. It was how AAs were implemented people had a problem with (amongst other things obviously) They started in loadouts, not map pick up items, they had Unlimited use. That’s what people hated. Just look around and you’ll see most people don’t have an issue with equipment because they’re a map pick up items and one time use. People have said repeatedly that if AAs were done along these lines they would welcome them back. Reaches MLG playlist was even praised by many on how it played because AAs were map pick up items and it played much better.
As far as the ranking system goes, yes if it had halo 3 style of ranking system reach would of done better somewhat I agree, but ultimately no it still would of gotten the same amount of backlash because reach fundamentally changed how Halo played, oh then there’s the bloom issue too lol. You can’t forget about the impact bloom had. The MAJORITY of players HATED bloom!! With the passion!!! Reaches ranking system was a small part of why a lot of people hated it. To think otherwise is to ignore all the other huge problems people had with it.
> The same is true for Halo 4 and Halo 5. No skill based rank? The game sucks.
You have to be kidding me about halo 4. No ranking system in the world would of saved it. The amount of things people hated with Halo 4 is too long to list here but it’s well documented. Hence why Halo 5 changed a lot of things from Halo 4 like getting ride of loadouts, killstreaks, having uneven starts and so on. Those were big things that people didn’t like.
Halo 5 has it’s issues, but these things i mention aren’t it. In many peoples minds, even the ones that don’t like Halo 5 overall, changing those things I mention back to how Halo used to play/be is a step in the right direction over Halo 4 by a country mile! Not the game as a whole remember just those things, Including myself.
The number 1 reason by far why Halo reach and Halo 4 are my least favorite is the lack of even starts and the fact loadouts were in (amongst other things too of course) Do I love Halo 5? No, there are a ton of things I’d change, but I like it a heck of a lot better then Reach or Halo 4. Ranking systems matter. I won’t say they don’t. It’s important to me too, but if I don’t like how the game plays, aka Reach and Halo 4, then no ranking system in the world is going to make me want to play a game piles, if at all, that I don’t really like.
> 2533274801176260;892:
> Being able to run and shoot simultaneously is not limiting. Not being able to do that - as we have been for two to three-ish games by now - on the other hand is.
> It is also what Spartans have been shown to be able to do in lore. Repeatedly. Even in 343’s own releases.
> If Spartans should finally act their part and no longer “play like CoD characters”, then sprint should be the first mechanic to go down the drain.
Or, they could make it so that you can sprint and shoot. You should be able to do what Spartans are known to be capable of doing. That’s the criteria 343i needs to work with when designing multiplayer.
> Btw, we also know for a fact that sprint is in the games because real-life soldiers do it and because other games have it.
Don’t really care why they did it. Only care what they’re going to do. I say Spartans should move like Spartans. It’s Halo.
> 2533274815533909;894:
> Bold - I don’t recall Microsoft forcing bungie to do that
Well, I guess I was a bit vague there. Account selling was trashing Microsoft’s TrueSkill algorithm. If someone who had no “skill” bought a top-tier account, then that meant that player would get matched with “top-tier” players. So, imagine a guy like me who never rose above Captain or something like that, jumping into a match where everyone else was a 50. What do you suppose the result of that match would have been, especially for my team? TrueSkill saw an excellent player that suddenly lost their mind or something. While TrueSkill was attempting to properly place me I continue to screw up matches for other 50’s, and their rank suffered as well. Eventually TrueSkill would put me where I belonged, and I would just go buy another 50 because I believed I belonged with the other 50’s.
Meanwhile, people that sold accounts made new ones and played against the lowest-tier players. Now TrueSkill is seeing a new player with remarkable skill, but had trouble deciding where they should be placed. In the meantime I continue to play against people trying to rank up legitimately and failing because I keep killing them. They can’t rank up and they can’t figure out why.
If you were the guy that sold 50’s you didn’t care what you were doing did to TrueSkill. If you were the guy buying 50s you didn’t care what you were doing did to TrueSkill. Everyone else, including Microsoft, cared a great deal what you were doing to TrueSkill. All of a sudden Microsofts ranking system was totally inaccurate. Microsoft couldn’t have that. TrueSkill was used in other games. Their reputation was at risk. The number one complaint was that people did not believe they were being ranked properly, because they weren’t. Also, selling accounts was illegal. That’s the main difference between buying something the developer is selling and buying something Microsoft absolutely did not want you to sell. People that say people didn’t get hurt and it was all innocent fun should have a talk with Microsoft about that. It’s still illegal.
What Microsoft told Bungie was that they needed to do something to remove the incentive to buy accounts. That incentive was Rank. A few people were stupid enough to buy Rank in Reach, but it quickly became clear that there was no point and the practice stopped.
> What are you talking about here? You make it sound like Halo 2 movement mechanics are different then Halo 3. Maybe they are SLIGHTLY, but nothing to write home about.
Significant by Halo standards. You could say Halo 2 wasn’t all that different from CE. The differences between 2 and 3 weren’t that big a deal. They are significant because there was any changes at all. Remember, Halo 3 was a new game running a new engine on a new console working on a new Multiplayer system. There was a whole bunch of significant -Yoink- there, not so much movement mechanics.
> People have said repeatedly that if AAs were done along these lines they would welcome them back.
Yeah, I know what people said. Trust me, if they could have gotten a “skill based rank” that showed in the lobby they wouldn’t have cared if AA’s started in loadouts, were scattered on the ground, or only available on Amazon. No one cared if Reach’s MLG playlist had them as pickups or not because no one played in Reach’s MLG playlist. Everyone was too busy just chanting over an over again that Reach sucked and people just didn’t want to be seen playing it. That’s why today you hear newer players wondering what was so bad about Reach, because they like it.
> You can’t forget about the impact bloom had. The MAJORITY of players HATED bloom!! With the passion!!! Reaches ranking system was a small part of why a lot of people hated it. To think otherwise is to ignore all the other huge problems people had with it.
I think Reach would have been more like ODST in terms of popularity, in that without all the negativity it would have shone on it’s merits, and people would have understood that it was a spinoff and it’s gameplay had nothing to do with the main series and thus could be ignored. Think about it. If you want to experiment do you do that with your main title or do you try it with a spinoff? Players were the ones that assumed the Reach way was the way it was going to be from then on. It’s the nature of gamers to jump the gun.
Bloom was in every Halo game prior to Reach. Reach just made it visible to the player. Bungie honestly thought it would help. What visible bloom did was to demonstrate to people that they weren’t as good a shot as they thought they were. If 343i hadn’t bought in to that crap people would have eventually learned how to use visible bloom. It’s not like no other game had it.
> You have to be kidding me about halo 4. No ranking system in the world would of saved it.
I believe Halo 4, like Reach, may have been judged differently if it had that same old Halo 3 mechanic. If Reach had skill-based rank, then Halo 4 also having skill-based rank would have made the changes to gameplay more palatable. Remember, one of the big things about Halo 4 was 343i “getting Rank right.”
> The number 1 reason by far why Halo reach and Halo 4 are my least favorite is the lack of even starts and the fact loadouts were in (amongst other things too of course)
I never bought that “Loadouts make starts uneven” stuff. The Loadouts were balanced, just like the weapons. None of it was perfectly balanced because Bungie was heading out the door and 343i was supposed to dial it in. Having no idea whatsoever what they were doing, all 343i managed to do was make everything worse, and then they doubled down on their mistakes with Halo 4. So, after two games, one Bungie’s and one theirs, they finally figured out that you can’t just wing this stuff. It’s been painful for all of us, but in the end you can tell they’ve learned and their future games will be more to our liking.
Especially if they stop encouraging a split in the community.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> > People have said repeatedly that if AAs were done along these lines they would welcome them back.
>
> Yeah, I know what people said. Trust me, if they could have gotten a “skill based rank” that showed in the lobby they wouldn’t have cared if AA’s started in loadouts, were scattered on the ground, or only available on Amazon. No one cared if Reach’s MLG playlist had them as pickups or not because no one played in Reach’s MLG playlist. Everyone was too busy just chanting over an over again that Reach sucked and people just didn’t want to be seen playing it. That’s why today you hear newer players wondering what was so bad about Reach, because they like it.
Trust you? On what authority? People say what they say because that’s what they think. You’re just coming up with your personal fiction, and there’s no reason we should believe any part of it. Certainly, I know why I disliked Reach, and it has nothing to do with the ranking system. If other people who actually disliked Reach want to speak up, they’re free to do so. Your speculation, however, is completely worthless.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> Bloom was in every Halo game prior to Reach. Reach just made it visible to the player. Bungie honestly thought it would help. What visible bloom did was to demonstrate to people that they weren’t as good a shot as they thought they were. If 343i hadn’t bought in to that crap people would have eventually learned how to use visible bloom. It’s not like no other game had it.
Bloom—the expansion of a weapon’s spread with each shot—was not in any Halo before Reach. The weapons before Reach had a constant spread. Slowing down your rate of fire did not reduce it. Not to mention the spread on precision weapons was negligible. The spread in the original trilogy functioned completely differently from the Bloom implemented in Reach. In particular, since it was constant, it didn’t matter what your rate of fire was, so there was no benefit from pacing.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> Or, they could make it so that you can sprint and shoot. You should be able to do what Spartans are known to be capable of doing. That’s the criteria 343i needs to work with when designing multiplayer.
While I agree that adding the ability to shoot is the bare minimum needed in order to make sprint work even remotely in the Halo gameplay, I also don’t see the point in doing that unless you absolutely want to have a mechanic that limits the players abilities. Sprint would still be mono-directional, preventing the player to shoot and strafe at max speed simultaneously, which they were able to do in the earlier games. And if you were to remove that restriction as well, then what’s the point in keeping the mechanic in the first place, if all it does is enable the player to do the same things he was doing before, just locked behind an additional button press? So get rid of the mechanic and free up the clutter on the controls while simultaneously making the gameplay more fluid.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> Don’t really care why they did it. Only care what they’re going to do. I say Spartans should move like Spartans. It’s Halo.
The point I was making is that 343’s modus operandi has never been “base the game on what Spartans can do” but rather “include the mechanics that appeal to the largest possible(!) target audience and then maybe retcon what doesn’t make sense”. Which, by the way, they usually don’t. We’re still stuck with numerous story-contradictions from even before the release of Halo 4, not to mention that it was never explained why Spartans suddenly can no longer shoot while running or have to resort to crued iron sights instead of the built-in smart-link module in their suit.
Anyways, the point still stands. Sprint goes against “Spartans moving like Spartans”, so there’s no lore reason to include it.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> The differences between 2 and 3 weren’t that big a deal. They are significant because there was any changes at all. Remember, Halo 3 was a new game running a new engine on a new console working on a new Multiplayer system.
While the rest of the statement is correct, Halo 3 had no new engine compared to its predecessors. In fact, excluding spinoffs such as Halo Wars and Spartan Assault, all the FPS Halo games are running on the same Blam!-engine, even though both Bungie (at Reach) and 343 (at H5G) were claiming differently during development. However, that was just twisting the truth ever so slightly in order to generate more hype prior to release, and both companies cleared things up after their respective games were released. Infinite will (presumably) be the first time a Halo FPS releases under a new engine.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> I think Reach would have been more like ODST in terms of popularity, in that without all the negativity it would have shone on it’s merits, and people would have understood that it was a spinoff and it’s gameplay had nothing to do with the main series and thus could be ignored. Think about it. If you want to experiment do you do that with your main title or do you try it with a spinoff? Players were the ones that assumed the Reach way was the way it was going to be from then on. It’s the nature of gamers to jump the gun.
How is it jumping the gun if it was true?
I actually agree with you for the most part, I did look at Reach as a spinoff and while I didn’t like the new movement mechanics (least of all sprint, but also the Jetpack and evade), I could look past them for the most part since Bungie tried something differently with their last game, also as a trial run for Destiny. I played Reach grudgingly, while looking forward to the next “true” Halo game, fully expecting it to go back to the original gameplay of the series - especially since 343 themselves claimed it to, being “based on Combat Evolved” and all. So did at least a dozen of my friends, btw. I could not have been more wrong and there probably could not have been a bigger lie for 343 to tell. And out of all of my friends, I’m the only one left even keeping in touch with the franchise.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> Bloom was in every Halo game prior to Reach. Reach just made it visible to the player. Bungie honestly thought it would help. What visible bloom did was to demonstrate to people that they weren’t as good a shot as they thought they were
As has already been mentioned, that is factually wrong. There was nothing like bloom in the earlier games, in fact modders looked through the game files and found no code that would even make such a mechanic possible.
> 2533274798957786;895:
> I never bought that “Loadouts make starts uneven” stuff. The Loadouts were balanced, just like the weapons. None of it was perfectly balanced because Bungie was heading out the door and 343i was supposed to dial it in. Having no idea whatsoever what they were doing, all 343i managed to do was make everything worse, and then they doubled down on their mistakes with Halo 4. So, after two games, one Bungie’s and one theirs, they finally figured out that you can’t just wing this stuff. It’s been painful for all of us, but in the end you can tell they’ve learned and their future games will be more to our liking.
The first thing 343 did when inheriting Reach was create ZBNS modes that were more like the original trilogy. The second thing they did was release Anniversary maps in its special dedicated playlist. I do not believe for a second that they had “no idea whatsoever what they were doing”, on the contrary, they were fully aware of Reach’s shortcomings and knew exactly what the community wanted. Hence the misleading marketing campaign and lies during development. They just don’t care enough to actually build their games around these wishes because they want to cash in on the larger gaming demographic that fancies Call of Duty and its cohorts. Which, in and of itself, is at least an understandable goal - maximize your profits by maximizing the clientele. Except it didn’t work. And then they started doubling down on their mistakes.
Unlike Dead End, I do not consider H5G to be “a step in the right direction”, in fact I regard it as the worst Halo game of the entire franchise - by far. “Even starts” do not make a balanced, much less a fun game. We still have armor abilities that break the gameplay, they’re just permanent and called differently. And instead of getting rid of them, they even added more (charge, vaulting, ADS, etc.) and made the ones that already didn’t work even worse (sprint for instance is now infinite, exponentially increasing the toll it takes on gameplay). Sure, they tried to implement some alibi-drawbacks (like linking sprint to the shields) but it didn’t work and arguably made the situation even worse: Players that hated the enhanced movement were still left dissatisfied, while those that actually enjoyed them before did not like the changes made to them. (I saw people right here on the forums, issueing “bug reports” that their shields didn’t recharge during sprint and requested it to be fixed, asap.)
Here’s hoping that with Infinite, they’ll finally swallow their pride and just cut away the fat, remove what never worked in the first place and stop shoving it down the throats of the last fans that they haven’t driven away from the franchise yet.
> 2533274801176260;897:
> > 2533274798957786;895:
> > Unlike Dead End, I do not consider H5G to be “a step in the right direction”, in fact I regard it as the worst Halo game of the entire franchise - by far. “Even starts” do not make a balanced, much less a fun game. We still have armor abilities that break the gameplay, they’re just permanent and called differently. And instead of getting rid of them, they even added more (charge, vaulting, ADS, etc.) and made the ones that already didn’t work even worse (sprint for instance is now infinite, exponentially increasing the toll it takes on gameplay). Sure, they tried to implement some alibi-drawbacks (like linking sprint to the shields) but it didn’t work and arguably made the situation even worse: Players that hated the enhanced movement were still left dissatisfied, while those that actually enjoyed them before did not like the changes made to them. (I saw people right here on the forums, issueing “bug reports” that their shields didn’t recharge during sprint and requested it to be fixed, asap.)
> >
> > Here’s hoping that with Infinite, they’ll finally swallow their pride and just cut away the fat, remove what never worked in the first place and stop shoving it down the throats of the last fans that you haven’t driven away from the franchise yet.
Bold - I just meant it was compared to Halo 4 as Halo 4 completely changed how Halo played compared to past games. To me Halo 4 doesn’t remotely feel like Halo. 343I got rid of things like loadouts, uneven starts, killstreaks ect. In Halo 5. To me, that is a step in the right direction, as in making those things like it used to be. I wasn’t trying to imply the game was, sorry if it seemed so. For me Halo 4 is the worst Halo. I think you and many people here know my stances on things 
I HATE ADS style zooming (heck one guy even said I’m the biggest proponent of it he seen on the forms lol 
) I don’t feel sprint is necessary at all, I’d rather things like AAs and SA be one time use map pick up items like equipment and so on.
Sorry if my statement was confusing earlier, maybe I’ll go back and edit it.
> 2533274815533909;898:
> Bold - I just meant it was compared to Halo 4 because they got rid of things like loadouts, uneven starts, killstreaks ect. To me those things are a step in the right direction, as in making it like it used to be. I wasn’t trying to imply the game was, sorry if it seemed so. For me Halo 4 is the worst Halo. I think you and many people here know my stances on things. I HATE ADS style zooming (heck one guy even said I’m the biggest proponent of it he seen on the forms lol) I don’t feel sprint is necessary at all, I’d rather things like AAs and SA be one time use map pick up items like equipment and so on.
> Sorry if my statement was confusing earlier, maybe I’ll go back and edit it.
No need to apologize, I understood what you were saying, I might have worded it badly myself.
I can see where you’re coming from, and I concede that removal of killstreaks and loadouts were some much-needed improvements to the benefit of the multiplayer.
I just don’t care about that.
Since I hardly ever play MP (and when I do, I don’t play competitively) these things usually don’t concern me. (Actually, in modes such as grifball, it was even slightly beneficial to choose whether to start with swort or hammer already in your hand, which was delegated to two different loadouts that otherwise were identical.) I’m much rather looking at the mechanics overall, everything that affects the moment-to-moment-gameplay, all across the board, including campaign. And in that regard, H5G is significantly worse than Halo 4: Sprint is still there, just worse. Armor abilities are still there, just worse. Inconsistent shooting mechanics are still there, just worse.
Sure, there were some slight improvements in the game compared to its predecessor (especially forge) but almost all of them were in supplementary features, usually specific to multiplayer (removal of killcams, loadouts, killstreaks, etc.) and none in general gameplay and mechanics. As somebody who primarily plays PvE (campaign, firefight, even spartan ops, etc.) this isn’t really relevant to me. And as the gameplay itself has gotten worse and worse, personally, if you’d force me to choose, I’d much rather play Halo 4 than the atrocity that is H5G. (Although I’d still pick any other Halo game over both of them, including Spartan Assault.)
> 2533274801176260;899:
> > 2533274815533909;898:
> > Bold - I just meant it was compared to Halo 4 because they got rid of things like loadouts, uneven starts, killstreaks ect. To me those things are a step in the right direction, as in making it like it used to be. I wasn’t trying to imply the game was, sorry if it seemed so. For me Halo 4 is the worst Halo. I think you and many people here know my stances on things. I HATE ADS style zooming (heck one guy even said I’m the biggest proponent of it he seen on the forms lol) I don’t feel sprint is necessary at all, I’d rather things like AAs and SA be one time use map pick up items like equipment and so on.
> > Sorry if my statement was confusing earlier, maybe I’ll go back and edit it.
>
> No need to apologize, I understood what you were saying, I might have worded it badly myself.
> I can see where you’re coming from, and I concede that removal of killstreaks and loadouts were some much-needed improvements to the benefit of the multiplayer.
> I just don’t care about that.
> Since I hardly ever play MP (and when I do, I don’t play competitively) these things usually don’t concern me. (Actually, in modes such as grifball, it was even slightly beneficial to choose whether to start with swort or hammer already in your hand, which was delegated to two different loadouts that otherwise were identical.) I’m much rather looking at the mechanics overall, everything that affects the moment-to-moment-gameplay, all across the board, including campaign. And in that regard, H5G is significantly worse than Halo 4: Sprint is still there, just worse. Armor abilities are still there, just worse. Inconsistent shooting mechanics are still there, just worse.
> Sure, there were some slight improvements in the game compared to its predecessor (especially forge) but almost all of them were in supplementary features, usually specific to multiplayer (removal of killcams, loadouts, killstreaks, etc.) and none in general gameplay and mechanics. As somebody who primarily plays PvE (campaign, firefight, even spartan ops, etc.) this isn’t really relevant to me. And as the gameplay itself has gotten worse and worse, personally, if you’d force me to choose, I’d much rather play Halo 4 than the atrocity that is H5G. (Although I’d still pick any other Halo game over both of them, including Spartan Assault.)
Kudos to you two for discussing things like civilized adults and not using terms like “fanboy” or “nostalgia goggles”