I feel like the new mobility in halo has really increased the skill cap in matchmaking, and I know that may not be popular opinion. Dont get me wrong I love the classic Halo feel to with its’ easy to learn hard to master style, but the new MCC is great for Halo vets like me to get that old play style back.
I hate clamber. I used to think it was cool back when they first showed MP gameplay of Halo 5, then I played the beta and realized it was a de-evolution of skill in Halo.
Whenever I play Halo’s 2 and 3 and even 4, I use and see others use crouch jumping as a tactical advantage that creates much more room for that classic crazy Halo gameplay that was unique to Halo. I can’t tell you how many tines I’ve died in Halo 5 because some pleb is crouching behind a corner when I clamber, then they melee me and gun me down before I have a chance to respond, because of the horrible clamber animation.
People seem to think that all of these crazy abilities were a neccesary change, but really it muddled up the gameplay even more from Halo 4, creating what many would agree to be an unoriginal formula. I wouldn’t say 5 is a COD clone, as it still is different from the monotony of such gameplay, but not by much. The similarities are obvious and troubling. It would behoove 343 to understand this, and if not revert to a working formula like, oh I don’t know, the MP giants 2-3? then at least try to find a solid middle that is at the very least UNIQUE. Halo 5 did not feel unique.
> 2533274825830455;1021:
> This analogy is not accurate. You do get another shot, as soon as you climb back up and try again, just like in basketball. What Clamber is is somebody sitting up there with the basket, catching the ball and putting it in if you miss.
That would be true if Clamber always worked if you missed a jump. I believe Clamber is more as previously described earlier here where you attempt to execute a jump and you are slightly off, but you can still make it if you reach out and grab for the ledge with your hand, as you would do IRL. I don’t think people depend on Clamber to complete their sloppiest jumps, and I don’t believe Clamber works every time. Clamber does not mean you failed to make a jump. Clamber means you are still trying to make the jump. Clamber is nothing more than an additional way to get around. Any player is free to restrict themselves to run, strafe, jump and crouch. Those are “classic” movement mechanics, and they never disappeared from Halo, which makes a thread about them “returning” problematic.
> Also, you’ve got the mentality wrong. It’s not you, it’s I. I have failed, I should suffer some consequences because it’s a supposed to be a game of skill. I want to fail and suffer the consequences because that is what makes the success feel rewarding. If I fail, and there’s a system in place that rectifies the failure, I feel wrongly rewarded because I didn’t do anything right.
Suffering is not something I want to do in any game. If I’m playing basketball and I miss a shot I don’t feel the need to suffer, nor do expect any consequences other than no point was scored. I don’t consider missing the shot a failure and something I should be ashamed of. All the greatest players miss shots. Frequently. They don’t go crying to the locker room. It happens. You keep playing. More importantly, you don’t call someone a failure because they missed a shot. You don’t beat people up for making mistakes in a game. It’s the language I object to. Failure. Consequences. Suffering. Punishment. Calling the successful use of Clamber after “failing” to execute a jump a “reward” that wasn’t really earned. Is this Halo or a prison camp?
These “new” movement mechanics that were introduced to Halo beginning with Reach are not “new” at all. Some of them could be considered “classic” in other games, some of which are older than Halo. 343i would be hard pressed, indeed, to come up with a movement mechanic that has never appeared in any other game ever, and thus make Halo unique. The days when that was even remotely possible are long gone. Halo can be unique in many ways. Movement mechanics is not one of them. As such, removing Ground Pound will not make Halo great again.
Unless they remove Spartan Charge as well. Then, maybe.
Or Sprint.
No more thrusters. That’s it. No more thrusters.
> 2533274798957786;1024:
> Suffering is not something I want to do in any game. If I’m playing basketball and I miss a shot I don’t feel the need to suffer, nor do expect any consequences other than no point was scored. I don’t consider missing the shot a failure and something I should be ashamed of. All the greatest players miss shots. Frequently. They don’t go crying to the locker room. It happens. You keep playing. More importantly, you don’t call someone a failure because they missed a shot. You don’t beat people up for making mistakes in a game. It’s the language I object to. Failure. Consequences. Suffering. Punishment. Calling the successful use of Clamber after “failing” to execute a jump a “reward” that wasn’t really earned. Is this Halo or a prison camp?
You are heavily overexaggerating the use of the word “failure” here, as if failure to do something is something disastrous or deserves a large amount of ridicule, criticism, or suffering.
Failure, by definition, is the lack of accomplishing the aim or purpose. Just like how “suffering”, by definition, is to experience or be affected by a (usually bad) event.
If the greatest basketball player missed a shot, he has failed on that particular shot. It may be not a big deal or even completely inconsequential, but that shot is still a failure. It’s only one’s negative connotations with failure do they keep playing or they “go crying to the locker room.”
Just like how with jumping, you don’t immediately quit the game and sell your Xbox just because you didn’t make it, you go back up and try again, or you just keep playing the game.
If you just said that a basketball player can overlook their failure of making a specific shot and keep playing the game without expecting the ability to make shots easier for them, why can’t you overlook the failure of missing a jump without introducing a mechanic to make jumping easier for you?
How the movement system should be:
-No sprint button.
-Simply push the joystick slightly if you want to creep/move slowly and fully push the joystick to move at full speed. Do not lower the player’s weapon at full speed.
-Keep grappling and thruster bursts if you must; just don’t have the entirety of all map design focused on it which is part of why none of 343i’s maps are any good. Turn it into a nice detail that can happen sometimes rather than “WELCOME TO HALO OF DUTY! WE’RE 343i AND YOU DO THIS ALL THE TIME NOW!”
The reason why it’s objectively dumb lowering the player’s weapon at full speed is because they are literally super soldiers in super suits which enhance their skills even further so it’s not just cumbersome, it’s against the lore.
“But…wait…now the series has to aimlessly make changes and the super soldiers in super suits should be incapable of muti-tasking!” Uhhh awkwaaard. Seriously, even a regular person can fire a gun while sprinting. I could probably figure that out and I’m only a MK-1. Literally a newborn baby can fire a gun while sprinting, albeit a toy gun but you get the idea.
I rant because I care.
> 2533274798957786;1024:
> That would be true if Clamber always worked if you missed a jump. I believe Clamber is more as previously described earlier here where you attempt to execute a jump and you are slightly off, but you can still make it if you reach out and grab for the ledge with your hand, as you would do IRL. I don’t think people depend on Clamber to complete their sloppiest jumps, and I don’t believe Clamber works every time.
Feel free to show where I said that you can never fail with Clamber, because I never said anything such. Sure, you can totally screw a jump to the point that even Clamber can’t save you (though, with most jumps people use, this really requires some major incompetence).
> 2533274798957786;1024:
> Clamber does not mean you failed to make a jump. Clamber means you are still trying to make the jump.
Doesn’t matter. You’re missing the point: Clamber makes jumps significantly easier by allowing attempts to succeed that would’ve failed without Clamber. Phrase it however you want, but that’s the issue with Clamber.
> 2533274798957786;1024:
> Clamber is nothing more than an additional way to get around. Any player is free to restrict themselves to run, strafe, jump and crouch. Those are “classic” movement mechanics, and they never disappeared from Halo, which makes a thread about them “returning” problematic.
Ah, yes, here comes the “just don’t use it”. That’s just totally unhelpful.
> 2533274798957786;1024:
> Suffering is not something I want to do in any game. If I’m playing basketball and I miss a shot I don’t feel the need to suffer, nor do expect any consequences other than no point was scored. I don’t consider missing the shot a failure and something I should be ashamed of. All the greatest players miss shots. Frequently. They don’t go crying to the locker room. It happens. You keep playing. More importantly, you don’t call someone a failure because they missed a shot. You don’t beat people up for making mistakes in a game. It’s the language I object to. Failure. Consequences. Suffering. Punishment. Calling the successful use of Clamber after “failing” to execute a jump a “reward” that wasn’t really earned. Is this Halo or a prison camp?
Who said anything about feeling ashamed? Crying? I’m just completely baffled by how or why you turn failure at a task into some negative thing. Failure is part of the game, it’s a part of learning. Anything that takes skill has the potential for failure, and a failure often comes with consequences. It’s not something to make a big deal out of, or be ashamed, or cry about. You fail, and you just try again, because that’s how you learn things.
Where there is failure, there is something interesting to learn. The presence of failure makes the game interesting. If there’s no failure, then the task itself is easy, and there’s nothing in it to learn. To me, the more there is to learn in a task the better I feel about succeeding at it. Things that are difficult are more rewarding than things that are easy. If you can’t agree with that, then I can’t help you.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> I don’t think movement mechanics should influence map design, and I don’t think map design should preclude any decent acceptable movement mechanic.
You can think what should and shouldn’t be done whatever you want, but that is how maps are designed. If you have an issue with that, take it up with the developers. Other than that, you’re right, this discussion is pointless because your stance is built on a nonexisting premise.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> This thread is supposed to be about the “return” of “classic” movement mechanics, but it seems to be more about which Abilities need to go so that pre-Reach players will return.
…the difference being…?
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> I think it’s safe to say that it’s not really the presence or absence of any particular Ability (Armor or Spartan) that has influenced Halo’s current online popularity.
[citation needed]
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> A lot of our perceptions about the validity of any particular movement mechanic has more to do with the implementation rather than the mechanic itself.
Well, so far we’ve had three different implementations of sprint, and none of them were liked by the classic community. Sure, you could go ahead and try to implement it in a dozen other ways 'till the cows come home, but if those fail as well, it might be time to apply Occam’s razor and consider that the mechanic itself might be the issue here.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> Abilities are meant to merely allow a player the ability to play in a way that is more comfortable for them, or to be more handy in a tactical situation.
Well, if that is what they are meant for, then they failed. Sprint makes the game less comfortable for me because it forces me to choose between fighting and running which I previously could do simultaneously.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> Keeping any or none will not influence Halo’s current popularity. It does not hinge on movement mechanics, “classic” or otherwise.
[citation needed]
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> There’s a lot about those old movement mechanics that we were not satisfied with.
There was? Pray tell, because I can’t remember any complaints about them (save maybe acceleration issues). I’ve heard people dissatisfied with the gunplay, weapon redundancy, hit detection, aim assisst, vehicle handling, vehicle resistance, netcode, etc. However, I have never encountered anybody that would say “You know what this game needs? A mechanic that stops me from shooting when I go full speed”.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> 343i has bent itself into a pretzel in an attempt to bend over backwards trying to get older players to like Abilities.
The community already told them they didn’t want abilities while Reach was still a thing, before they even started working on their first game. I do not consider forcing them onto the playerbase as something commendable and they don’t get an A for effort.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> The old players “got good” playing the old games. They won’t play the new games.
Just so you know, my stats got better ever since those flashy mechanics were introduced, because it’s now easier than ever before to cheat death. “Being better at the game” is not the issue here. I’d rather lose in a game I enjoy than win in a game I despise.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> The old players are never coming back, and it does not matter if they do. […]They are no longer your target market. There are probably more than enough new players to start a whole new player base that is more open to possibilities and less intent on reliving past glories.
Aaaaand there we have it. The snake has finally shown its face. When people have another preference than I do, -Yoink- 'em. Do not cater to them, 343. It’s my way or the highway.
Also, [citation needed]
> 2535444702990491;49:
> There has already been a topic for this, it’s the sprint debate… And it’s been droning on and on and on about the same thing.
>
> Classic mechanics are classic for a reason- they were great when we had them but we should be ready for new changes with new games. Otherwise you may be better off just enjoying the older, classic Halo games instead of expecting 343i to cater to your demands in new titles.
>
> And luckily for those diehard old school fans, 343i has been generous enough to bring back all the classic Halo titles in the MCC (except for Reach which is backwards compatible anyway) which you can all still enjoy and find MP matches on to this day.
That is by far the most nonsensical drivel I have ever read. I actually had to re-read the post to make sure I understood your argument. “They were great when we had them” You do realize that H3 was around when COD was? Halo 3 was a modern game in the same era as MW2. Yet the lack of sprint didn’t make people say “Oh this game is so OOLD”. The fact that not having sprint has anything to do with New vs. Old is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. If you add sprint to Halo, the maps simply become elongated. Taking away sprint makes them shorter and tighter. sprinting 5 seconds on Truth is equal to walking 5 seconds on Midship. Suggesting that sprint is, on it’s own, a “new” mechanic is a very stupid thing to believe.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> This sort of mentality disturbs me.
>
> “You have failed.”
> “You don’t deserve any chance whatsoever to still achieve your objective.”
> “You should have known.”
> “You should have done it correctly to begin with.”
> “Clamber is a get-out-of-jail-free card for people that refuse to learn to correctly jump (as I did).”
>
> Sounds like one of those stressed-out high school basketball coaches that gives a player the once-over because he missed a catch or flubbed a basket. That player has no right to feel good about himself any more because he failed. A good player gets it right *every time.*I mean, the guy that took a shot and missed does not deserve the chance to jump back up and try to tip the ball in. No sir. He’s done. Should probably just leave.
> 2533274798957786;1024:
> Suffering is not something I want to do in any game. If I’m playing basketball and I miss a shot I don’t feel the need to suffer, nor do expect any consequences other than no point was scored. I don’t consider missing the shot a failure and something I should be ashamed of. All the greatest players miss shots. Frequently. They don’t go crying to the locker room. It happens. You keep playing. More importantly, you don’t call someone a failure because they missed a shot. You don’t beat people up for making mistakes in a game. It’s the language I object to. Failure. Consequences. Suffering. Punishment. Calling the successful use of Clamber after “failing” to execute a jump a “reward” that wasn’t really earned. Is this Halo or a prison camp?
==>>
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> Failing is good. That’s how you learn.
> 2533274798957786;1024:
> > 2533274825830455;1021:
> > This analogy is not accurate. You do get another shot, as soon as you climb back up and try again, just like in basketball. What Clamber is is somebody sitting up there with the basket, catching the ball and putting it in if you miss.
>
> That would be true if Clamber always worked if you missed a jump. I believe Clamber is more as previously described earlier here where you attempt to execute a jump and you are slightly off, but you can still make it if you reach out and grab for the ledge with your hand, as you would do IRL. I don’t think people depend on Clamber to complete their sloppiest jumps, and I don’t believe Clamber works every time. Clamber does not mean you failed to make a jump. Clamber means you are still trying to make the jump. Clamber is nothing more than an additional way to get around. Any player is free to restrict themselves to run, strafe, jump and crouch. Those are “classic” movement mechanics, and they never disappeared from Halo, which makes a thread about them “returning” problematic.
>
>
> > Also, you’ve got the mentality wrong. It’s not you, it’s I. I have failed, I should suffer some consequences because it’s a supposed to be a game of skill. I want to fail and suffer the consequences because that is what makes the success feel rewarding. If I fail, and there’s a system in place that rectifies the failure, I feel wrongly rewarded because I didn’t do anything right.
>
> Suffering is not something I want to do in any game. If I’m playing basketball and I miss a shot I don’t feel the need to suffer, nor do expect any consequences other than no point was scored. I don’t consider missing the shot a failure and something I should be ashamed of. All the greatest players miss shots. Frequently. They don’t go crying to the locker room. It happens. You keep playing. More importantly, you don’t call someone a failure because they missed a shot. You don’t beat people up for making mistakes in a game. It’s the language I object to. Failure. Consequences. Suffering. Punishment. Calling the successful use of Clamber after “failing” to execute a jump a “reward” that wasn’t really earned. Is this Halo or a prison camp?
>
> These “new” movement mechanics that were introduced to Halo beginning with Reach are not “new” at all. Some of them could be considered “classic” in other games, some of which are older than Halo. 343i would be hard pressed, indeed, to come up with a movement mechanic that has never appeared in any other game ever, and thus make Halo unique. The days when that was even remotely possible are long gone. Halo can be unique in many ways. Movement mechanics is not one of them. As such, removing Ground Pound will not make Halo great again.
>
> Unless they remove Spartan Charge as well. Then, maybe.
>
> Or Sprint.
>
> No more thrusters. That’s it. No more thrusters.
In other words, you want the game to handhold you and spoonfeed you. You don’t want to think or to perform actions in-game that you 100% control. You want the game to play itself so you can feel like a badass. Strong argument.
One argument I love to pose to defenders of the H5 moveset is that you don’t need to really UNDERSTAND a map anymore. I want everyone to stop and think about Construct in Halo 3. If anyone tries jumping from top open or closed to the sniper spawn, they know that you have to jump from the elevated parts of the ramp. You can’t jump from the lower part. Otherwise, your feet clip the edge and you fall. Furthermore, once you’re on the Sniper ramp, you’ve committed. You cannot jump back easily to those lanes for quick cover, meaning you have to drop down or go back to lobby. Take this same instance in Halo 5. Clamber allows you to jump from anywhere and make the jump back from anywhere. Very Very rarely do you see intentional map design where a player is forced in one direction in Halo 5 due to moveset limitations. You don’t have to be precise when you jump from P2 to P3 on Truth. You just have to clamber the edging at any point. But you had to be careful when doing the same jump on Midship/Heretic because there was a specific ledge to stand on. Only look as far as the Halo CE maps that were “remade” for H5. In H5, these maps are played with sprint. And it is obvious that the maps have been ballooned up to compensate for the H5 moveset. If your really think about this, the fact that the map is increased in size really serves no purpose. Where in Halo CE you were able to walk around the map with one speed, in H5, you are forced to have your gun lowered to sprint around the map and get to places in the exact same time as Halo CE. The idea of Sprint = Speed is an obvious illusion. When you add sprint, you increase the map size so you negate any “speed” that you gained by adding sprint. It’s essentially mapping your top speed to a button and preventing you from aiming when that button is pressed vs. automatically moving at top speed with no limitations. The only real argument in their defense is “I wanna feel cool. REEEEEE”
> 2535415539486588;1033:
> - YouTube
>
> B.B. King - The Thrill Is Gone ( 1969 ) HD - YouTube
Might want to contribute with something more than just YouTube links.
Well, enough about me.
Seriously, I want to hear some discussion about what “classic movement” is, and when did it go away. Because the thread is titled “The Return of Classic Movement Mechanics.” I also really, really want to know why whatever left needs to return. I will admit to unintentionally derailing because of the “failure” thing, and I’ll get to that in a moment.
What I am reading here is that these newer mechanics that were introduced starting with Reach somehow detract from the experience known collectively as “Classic Halo”. The most extreme label the newer mechanics has received here so far is “handholding”. They are elements that give novice players the skill of advanced players. Additionally, the newer mechanics make getting around any particular map so easy that the challenge has disappeared and it is no longer fun. Finding, engaging and defeating targets is practically automatic. Once a match starts, one could set the controller down and just watch what happens. This is why Halo no longer enjoys the glory it once had.
Don’t get excited. I made that last part up 
You get the idea, though.
Also, a lot of people reference Call of Duty and I guess that’s fair but, just so you know, I have about one hour of actual game time with CoD, and that was that “alien hoard mode” thing they had in, I think, CoD4? Anyway, that’s it. Those references are lost on me. If you say Halo 5 is like CoD, all I can think while playing Halo 5 is, “so, CoD must be like this.”
What I said about failure was in response to this exchange:
> 2533274825830455;1011:
> > 2533274808538326;1010:
> > Say let’s go with that longer and higher jump like you suggested, clamber wouldn’t be as important but could save your life if you misjudge an angle or a distance, that way it’s moved from “gotta use it often” to “good when you need it”. Not necessary to win but nice to have.
> >
> > That a good middle ground?
>
> Not really, because there’s a fundamental disagreement here I feared we’d run into. You see, to me if you misjudge an angle or a distance, you’ve failed, and that’s it. You don’t deserve to save yourself, because you should’ve known where you can jump, you should’ve gotten your timing and direction right. That’s the skill of jumping. I value the challenge of movement, and therefore see the ability of Clamber to save a failed jump as a definite negative. Apart from the animation, that’s the main feature of it I’m looking to get rid of. But if that’s exactly the feature you value, then there’s no middle ground for us. We just enjoy the game for fundamentally different reasons.
You’ve failed, and that’s it. You don’t deserve to save yourself.
Even if you could.
I find that sort of rhetoric disturbing. That’s just me, I guess. Please do not further derail the subject of “The Return of Classic Movement Mechanics” by arguing with me about failure. I will not respond.
> 2533274863262182;1032:
> One argument I love to pose to defenders of the H5 moveset is that you don’t need to really UNDERSTAND a map anymore. I want everyone to stop and think about Construct in Halo 3. If anyone tries jumping from top open or closed to the sniper spawn, they know that you have to jump from the elevated parts of the ramp. You can’t jump from the lower part. Otherwise, your feet clip the edge and you fall. Furthermore, once you’re on the Sniper ramp, you’ve committed. You cannot jump back easily to those lanes for quick cover, meaning you have to drop down or go back to lobby. Take this same instance in Halo 5. Clamber allows you to jump from anywhere and make the jump back from anywhere. Very Very rarely do you see intentional map design where a player is forced in one direction in Halo 5 due to moveset limitations. You don’t have to be precise when you jump from P2 to P3 on Truth. You just have to clamber the edging at any point. But you had to be careful when doing the same jump on Midship/Heretic because there was a specific ledge to stand on. Only look as far as the Halo CE maps that were “remade” for H5. In H5, these maps are played with sprint. And it is obvious that the maps have been ballooned up to compensate for the H5 moveset. If your really think about this, the fact that the map is increased in size really serves no purpose. Where in Halo CE you were able to walk around the map with one speed, in H5, you are forced to have your gun lowered to sprint around the map and get to places in the exact same time as Halo CE. The idea of Sprint = Speed is an obvious illusion. When you add sprint, you increase the map size so you negate any “speed” that you gained by adding sprint. It’s essentially mapping your top speed to a button and preventing you from aiming when that button is pressed vs. automatically moving at top speed with no limitations. The only real argument in their defense is “I wanna feel cool. REEEEEE”
You understand that there are jumps in Halo 5 that you cant get up too without jumping off another object right? Not everything is accessible with clamber. If construct was made just how it is and put into Halo 5 yes you would only need to clamber up to it, that is the reason they redesign maps. However, the fact that they have to redesign the maps for the new abilities doesn’t somehow mean the abilities are bad or redundant.
When I say it is for speed i dont mean area transversal, I mean combat speed. The speed you are moving in comparision to another player. Without sprint you cant blitz people. You can’t do the sprint, slide, jump, thrust combo. You can’t use that combo with hover to cross even greater distances in the air. You can’t spartan charge. You can’t catch people off guard when they are sprinting and you are not. You can’t run away(there are tactical ways to use this like leading one or more enemies to the rest of your team or into a trap).
I will put this out there. I personally dont want sprint as many of these could be dont without sprint but with other abilities after watching the Doom eternal gameplay i can guarantee that. However, what im hoping for gameplay wise still wouldn’t be “classic gameplay”.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> Well, enough about me.
>
> Seriously, I want to hear some discussion about what “classic movement” is, and when did it go away. Because the thread is titled “The Return of Classic Movement Mechanics.” I also really, really want to know why whatever left needs to return. I will admit to unintentionally derailing because of the “failure” thing, and I’ll get to that in a moment.
>
> 1. What I am reading here is that these newer mechanics that were introduced starting with Reach somehow detract from the experience known collectively as “Classic Halo”.
>
> 2. The most extreme label the newer mechanics has received here so far is “handholding”. They are elements that give novice players the skill of advanced players.
>
> 3. Additionally, the newer mechanics make getting around any particular map so easy that the challenge has disappeared and it is no longer fun.
>
> 4. Finding, engaging and defeating targets is practically automatic. Once a match starts, one could set the controller down and just watch what happens. This is why Halo no longer enjoys the glory it once had.
>
> Don’t get excited. I made that last part up
> You get the idea, though.
-
Subjective, but overall not incorrect IMO.
-
They don’t “give” novice players the skill of advanced players and overdramatizing it as such doesn’t help your case, it hinders it, IMO. It’s not that they give more skill, it’s that they allow more forgiving of mistakes/poor decisions at the cost of adding unnecessary complexity.
-
NO. It’s that the challenge is diminished… and less challenging is less fun.
-
NO. Finding, engaging and defeating targets is not practically automatic… but the “idea” that I “get” is that all of the extra ‘cool factor’, bright and flashy, button mashing, fancy moves do little more than add a feeling of making many encounters feel pre-programmed. ‘If my opponent uses [button combo] move X, I counter with [button combo] move Y’… and it often boils down to who can come up with the better combos and/or faster button mashes than who can actually outthink their opponent faster.
A lot of people like to use the “Easy to learn, hard to master” statement in regards to [whatever their opinion entails of] classic Halo. While I agree with that part, I find the new Halo games to be a PITA to learn… and yet… not really any easier to “master”, because there will always be someone else who is more skilled and have a better mastery of the game than you. Or me. Some enhanced moves just feel tacked on for little more than gratuity’s sake. I want a Halo game that makes me feel like (when I’m defeated in combat) I was beaten by someone who just plain out fought me, out thought me, out played me, not one that makes me feel like I was out button mashed first and whether or not my opponent out thought me is an afterthought. I want innovation to be shown off by the people playing the game and less because of bunch of gimmicky mechanics that show off the innovation of the people who made it.
> 2533274825830455;1034:
> > 2535415539486588;1033:
> > - YouTube
> >
> > B.B. King - The Thrill Is Gone ( 1969 ) HD - YouTube
>
> Might want to contribute with something more than just YouTube links.
I already have. Lighten up.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> Seriously, I want to hear some discussion about what “classic movement” is
Run’n’Gun.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> and when did it go away.
Reach.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> The most extreme label the newer mechanics has received here so far is “handholding”.
I’d argue the most extreme label the newer mechanics have received is " -Yoink- ", but yeah, let’s go with “handholding” instead…
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> They are elements that give novice players the skill of advanced players.
Calling it “skill” is a big stretch… the more popular expression among critics is “get out of jail free card”.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> Finding, engaging and defeating targets is practically automatic.
I’m not sure purists would agree. An often-heard argument is that movement abilities have meddled with the natural flow of maps due to less predictable player movement. But since I don’t play much multiplayer, somebody with a more in-depth grasp of the topic should probably explain this.
As for the “deafeating targets” part, well, that has become more and more of a chore as the games went on. In Reach, some players could just turn their tail and run if they had a sprint loadout, forcing you to either chase them (if you were lucky to have the same AA) or just give up the kill as you cannot shoot while sprinting. In Halo 4, every player can do this now, and it has become far more common, but as sprint was limited, you just needed to be persistent (and lucky you don’t run into the enemy team) and you could still mop up the kill. In H5G, however, sprint is now infinite, so once somebody disengages from combat and runs away, the game effectively stops because they can sprint away indefinitely and just need to wait until their pursuer gets bored. And on top of that there is now clamber and thruster that perpetuate the problem by giving the player even more mechanics to evade and escape. Hence the “get out of jail free card” denomination from above.
These videos haven’t been posted in quite a while now, but here’s the issue from the attacker’s point of view and here from the runner’s.
The problem is not (only) some decrease in skill of gunfights, but the fact that so many of them now turn into a Roadrunner-and-Wile-E.-Coyote-cartoon…
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> You’ve failed, and that’s it. You don’t deserve to save yourself.
>
> Even if you could.
>
> I find that sort of rhetoric disturbing.
> 2533274798957786;1016:
> Failing is good. That’s how you learn.
It gets funnier every time…^^
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> I will not respond.
Yeah, we kinda noticed…
> 2533274801176260;1039:
> Yeah, we kinda noticed…
Make you a deal, though. If you discuss the topic instead of me, I might be more willing to respond to you.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> Seriously, I want to hear some discussion about what “classic movement” is, and when did it go away.
“Classic movement” refers to the pre-Reach movement mechanics where the only movement abilities the player has are running, jumping, and crouching. Gamepley that includes any other movement ability is not strictly speaking classic. With that said, I think you’ll find that many people who object to the Halo 5 style shotgun approach to movement mechanics are not completely against the notion of augumenting the classic movement with something. They just want to tread far more carefully. Of course, with the way these discussions are structured, the nuances of people’s opinions are swept aside.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> They are elements that give novice players the skill of advanced players.
No, it’s slightly more complex than that. Something that eliminates all skill difference between novice and what would previously have been considered as advanced players would be a design blunder at whole another level. You should rather consider it as compressing the whole skill spectrum, like compressing a spring. Players at differing skill levels are moved closer to each other, but a novice player doesn’t suddenly become as good as an average player. Performance differences of players at various skill levels are smaller than they used to be, but not suddenly completely gone.
It’s also worth noting that mechanics don’t compress the skill spectrum equally at all points. For example, Clamber most notably allows players who are not very good at jumping to faill far less often, but among players who are already really good at jumping there wasn’t nearly as much failing to begin with. Therefore we expect the compression to be more significant at the low end of the spectrum than the high end. In contrast, in Reach the Jetpack allowed players to fly to whatever high point on the map they wanted. For low skill players this hardly makes a difference, because they don’t know much about positioning. However, for skilled players who understand positioning this allows them to abuse the map’s design maximally. Therefore we’d expect the Jetpack to affect high level players more than low level players.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> Finding, engaging and defeating targets is practically automatic. Once a match starts, one could set the controller down and just watch what happens.
Putting this exaggeration aside, you weren’t far off.
> 2533274798957786;1035:
> You’ve failed, and that’s it. You don’t deserve to save yourself.
>
> Even if you could.
>
> I find that sort of rhetoric disturbing. That’s just me, I guess. Please do not further derail the subject of “The Return of Classic Movement Mechanics” by arguing with me about failure. I will not respond.
Not sure what’s so disturbing about it. It’s just a game, after all, and some people enjoy challenges in games. They don’t want the game to hold their hand.