The return of classic movement mechanics?

Games Halo Infinite
1202

> 2533274801973487;1198:
> > 2533274797640604;1197:
> > > - How is the sandbox not balanced? You got a good utility weapon, that functions well in it’s role, an usefull short range AR, your regular snipe/rockets, PP/PR that do actually bring a new layer to the sandbox rather then beeing reskined version of their UNSC counterparts and, well the needler…
> > > The only really unique thing that is missing from HCE but is there in other Halos is the sword.
> >
> > It’s not balanced because there’s no tactical reason not to use pistol in every conceivable situation other than no ammo or boredom. You can talk up the utility of AR or Plasma whatevers all you want; then and now if you’re playing H1 seriously, you’re running pistols and holding down rocks, snipes, and whichever power up. It’s competitively irresponsible not to.
>
> How does that differ from any other Halo? You’re running BR (H2/H3), DMR (Reach), BR or DMR (H4) or Pistol/BR/DMR/LR or CC (5) and try to control rockets, snipes, and power ups?

The difference is the other weapons were massively improved. So while each Halo had the work horse rifles, there was way more counter play involved.

> 2533274801973487;1198:
> > The rifles didn’t play the same.
> > - BR is the most flexible at range and also close quarters.
> > - DMR was most lethal with patient firing at a longer range.
> > - LR had high impact zoomed and BR like utility from the hip (ruined in H5).
> > - CC was the highest single shot RoF, a DMR for the impatient.
> > While they all are meant to function at range, diversion of the archetype offered players options that expressed their playstyle. Meanwhile in H1, you have this one crazy pistol.
>
> Yes, they do feature minor changes in their stats but does that really impact how you play the game in any meaningfull way?

Yes.

> 2533274801973487;1198:
> Did anyone actually run past an BR without picking it up because the DMR fits your playstyle better?

Yes. What do you think the controversy over loadouts were if everybody would equip a BR anyway?

> 2533274801973487;1198:
> Or would you pick it up knowing it an upgrade to your pistol and not much different to any other rifle? To use your own words: it would be competitively irresponsible not to…

Everybody should use a rifle, yes. They’re a class of weapons. It’s not just one weapon. Also as you said AR types got buffed. Your only responsibility is to maximize your weapon.

> 2533274801973487;1198:
> > I am an experienced player that invested time in every Halo competitively. The pistol ruled H1. The long rifle weapons did not play the same.It’s actually kind of absurd that you would dismiss those rifles as homogenous while defending the sole work horse of H1.
>
> As in any other Halo the utility precision is “king” but I find myself using AR and PR a lot more in HCE then I’m using anyother non-precision weapon in any other Halo.

They felt good to use.

> 2533274801973487;1198:
> > Tanks dominated in H1 BTB maps because back then they were geographically linear
>
> Thanks for the clarification
>
>
>
>
> > Due to the game not being online it took a while for awareness to spread that the pistol was absolutely required to remain competitive
>
> Again, it’s the same with any other Halo and, to me, the staple of what Halos core gameplay is all about. After all, MLG kinda tried to replicate the HCE style of gameplay with both H2 and H3 (and Reach as well, as far as I know?!)

I don’t care what MLG does.

1203

> 2533274825830455;1194:
> > 2533274798957786;1192:
> > The other thing is that there was no thought given to multiplayer during the development of Halo CE. Therefore, there was no effort to have the game perform magnificently in a multiplayer setting.By that I mean things like weapon balance, equal starts, golden triangle, BMS, or whatever else you’re supposed to mix together to get classic movement mechanics. A lot of what is attributed to Halo’s unique multiplayer experience has more to do with the character meeting the criteria of an augmented human wearing fusion-powered intelligent armor with built-in shields. Halo CE’s multiplayer was simply the campaign settings in a multiplayer environment.
>
> Well, this is just false. First of all, I really recommend listening to this interview with the Halo CE multiplayer Lead Designer Hardy LeBel who was basically the guy responsible for the Halo CE multiplayer.

I am really enjoying this interview. The style it is done in is fantastic. I love the Webcam, unrehearsed, postmortem structure. 26:20 stood out for me. He talks about Halo being the product of a studio that had worked on 4 previous FPS titles together, and they had really just hit their stride. And it’s hard not to think about 343i and MS’ decision to build a new studio to a AAA title 2 years after the last release.

I guess it’s a lesson learned though, since MS is buying up studios that have talent and titles already there.

1204

I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate. Every time I go back and play Halo 2 and 3, although I still enjoy them I definitely feel how archaic their gameplay has become.

1205

> 2533274841139340;1204:
> I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate.

Okay, and how do you know that? Is there a source or reliable statement where it proves it as true?

Can you even describe the “modern gaming climate”? If anything, games are leaning toward Battle Royale, which generally plays slower than the high-octane advanced movement you’ve seen in 2014-ish.

I mean, Halo 5 in itself proves you wrong. It plays closer to Halo 2/3 than (vanilla) Halo Reach and Halo 4 did, but people seem to like that game. Why didn’t we take Halo 4’s mechanics even further instead of axing half of them?

Finally, how is it any different than me just saying “Halo Infinite can only survive if it’s classic”?

1206

as someone who wants real halo gameplay, even if they finally implemented it, the game will still be crappy from all the other problems. 343 wants microtransactions, poor matchmaking systems and poor ranking systems. Its why mcc is crappy most of the time and why halo 5 is crappy all the time.

1207

[deleted]

1208

> 2533274841139340;1204:
> I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate. Every time I go back and play Halo 2 and 3, although I still enjoy them I definitely feel how archaic their gameplay has become.

I think as long as a game is fun and separates itself from the competition, people will enjoy it. There’s really no way to prove that classic Halo doesn’t appeal to the general demographic, unless we actually see it happen. So far, classic Halo is 3 for 3.

1209

> 2533274841139340;1204:
> I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate. Every time I go back and play Halo 2 and 3, although I still enjoy them I definitely feel how archaic their gameplay has become.

I don’t. Gears of War says otherwise. Judgment strayed far enough from ‘classic’ Gears gameplay and failed miserably. GOW4 started with GOW3’s basics and built from there, just like its pre-Judgment iterations had done. Rod Fergusson even went on record as calling it “Evolution, no revolution”. It’s doing well enough, despite the shortcomings any game has, to have GOW5 in development.

It’s not about going back to Halo 2 or 3 and it never has been. It’s about a natural evolution of gameplay built on a basic design philosophy that doesn’t get forgotten, abandoned or dismantled bit by bit until it’s barely recognizable. I don’t get why people seem to keep getting the same misunderstanding over, and over, and over… that classic movement means going back to an older game. Nobody wants Halo 3 all over again. I’d wager to say that most want classic movement concepts to be prevalent in the next game and not buried under a layer of fluff mechanics.

1210

> 2533274841139340;1204:
> I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate. Every time I go back and play Halo 2 and 3, although I still enjoy them I definitely feel how archaic their gameplay has become.

No such thing as “too old gameplay”. Examples: MOTHER****ING MARIO. That’s like saying CoD needs building because the modern gaming climate likes Fortnite therefore every shooter needs building. That takes away any sense of variety to say any game needs to stick to its climate. I hear this only from the shooter community, too, so I think it may have to do with the fact that many pop games like CoD or Fortnite are shooters and so we’re used to jumping on bandwagons more than, say, the RPG community. But this freedom-restricting mindset is one that will lead to boredom fast.

1211

> 2594261035368257;1209:
> > 2533274841139340;1204:
> > I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate. Every time I go back and play Halo 2 and 3, although I still enjoy them I definitely feel how archaic their gameplay has become.
>
> I don’t. Gears of War says otherwise. Judgment strayed far enough from ‘classic’ Gears gameplay and failed miserably. GOW4 started with GOW3’s basics and built from there, just like its pre-Judgment iterations had done. Rod Fergusson even went on record as calling it “Evolution, no revolution”. It’s doing well enough, despite the shortcomings any game has, to have GOW5 in development.
>
> It’s not about going back to Halo 2 or 3 and it never has been. It’s about a natural evolution of gameplay built on a basic design philosophy that doesn’t get forgotten, abandoned or dismantled bit by bit until it’s barely recognizable. I don’t get why people seem to keep getting the same misunderstanding over, and over, and over… that classic movement means going back to an older game. Nobody wants Halo 3 all over again. I’d wager to say that most want classic movement concepts to be prevalent in the next game and not buried under a layer of fluff mechanics.

True but Halos philosophies for mechanics used to be slowly paced yet fast gunplay kind of gameplay. Duel wielding and equipment didn’t contradict this, so people didn’t mind those changes.

1212

I’d hope at least some of 5’s abilities are retained or maybe re-worked for Infinite.

Basically I like feeling agile. It feels good to me from a gameplay perspective and it makes sense to me that a super-soldier would be quick as well powerful.

That said, I’d be okay with sprint being removed as long as base running speed was increased enough. But I like thrust and clamber - both for agility reasons, but with clamber there is also a tactile element I like, seeing the chief or your spartan interact with the environment adds a bit of immersion, helps create the feeling you’re part of the world and not just floating through it.

I’m not keen on spartan charge so wouldn’t mind if that was removed, and I’m kinda indifferent about ground-pound, it’s not something I really used much.

1213

I’m all for classic movement as long as we get sprint and clamber.

1214

> 2533274833081329;1205:
> > 2533274841139340;1204:
> > I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate.
>
> Okay, and how do you know that? Is there a source or reliable statement where it proves it as true?
>
> Can you even describe the “modern gaming climate”? If anything, games are leaning toward Battle Royale, which generally plays slower than the high-octane advanced movement you’ve seen in 2014-ish.
>
> I mean, Halo 5 in itself proves you wrong. It plays closer to Halo 2/3 than (vanilla) Halo Reach and Halo 4 did, but people seem to like that game. Why didn’t we take Halo 4’s mechanics even further instead of axing half of them?
>
> Finally, how is it any different than me just saying “Halo Infinite can only survive if it’s classic”?

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Well said!!!

I must admit, I’m beyond tired of hearing statements like " if a new Halo came out and played more like old Halo, the game wouldn’t do well…or survive or whatever" where is all this evidence that says it wouldn’t??? Halo 4 and 5 didn’t exactly set the gaming world on fire with all there “modern movement” and such (for the record I’m not hating on either one of those games I’m just making a point) as others have said, people don’t want a clone of halo 2/3.

It’s like when people said 2D games are dead. You can’t make a new Mario game in 2D and expect it to be good people said…what does Nintendo finally do a few years ago, just that and it was HUGE! Sonic fans have been pleading with Sega for YEARS to make a new 2D Sonic game. They finally did this year and it’s gotten enormous praise by critics and fans alike.

So I ask again, where is all this proof and evidence that Halo playing more like the original Halo games means certain failure and not being popular??? Answer, as of right now, there is none… and that is a fact!

1215

> 2533274797640604;1188:
> >> TheCelticDragon
>
>
> >
>
>
>
> > Halo 4 wasn’t a very functional game for the first year (most crucial year) of its lifespan and died due to being both a glitchy mess and not knowing what it wanted to be. Stimulating is in the eye of the beholder, a game aims to be stimulating, a poor VR game or indie game is stimulating it’s not hard.
>
> This is one of the uncomfortable things I was talking about that you guys take issue with.
>
> Halo 4, again, was far more functional and fun than what a great deal of you are willing to accept. It was not a “glitchy mess”, and its gameplay identity wasn’t quite as ambiguous as you’d want to believe. Now I’m not gonna sit here and pretend it was some definitive Halo title or even that I liked every decision made in the game (many decisions that undermined its own potential, 343 mishandled their own Ordinance and scoring system), but Halo 4 had a healthy enough population right up until X1 dropped. I’m sure that’s an affront to the “Millions need to be online for a game to be considered alive” mantra, but in the modern age of much larger selection pool of games each vying for maximum player attention, it was well enough.
>
>
> >

Ya I had to chime in here,

I think the TheCelticDragon is pretty close to right here. Like 90% lol I was there day 1, and for many days after, it wasn’t pretty. I would say Halo 4 was semi functional. Was it MCC broken? No… Did the game work? Sure, but especially MP wise was pretty broken at times with bugs and gameplay wise. It also left out some key staple features.

The UI in MP was beyond bad and it was glitchy. Powers like the hardlight shield and evade were big timed bugged. So was hologram. Weapons like starting with the PP or the OP bolt shot was a huge joke and anyone that played the game for 10 minutes can see how OP it was (starting with a one-hit-kill weapon LOL) Invisibility and Promethean vision we’re so overpowered!! weapons like the saw, which is arguably the most overpowered gun in Halo history was introduced (unfortunately…) Features like the red “X” wasn’t even in the game!!! Lol Call outs were next to non-existent, partly because power weapons we’re now dropping down anywhere. The BR was just TERRIBLE (thank goodness they changed that later)

There is lots more as we know too. Not everything was bugged or glitches, you’re right on that, alot of it was just really bad poor decisions… but there was enough of it for the first 6 months easily.

Now, to say Halo 4 had a heathly population is pretty laughable though I must admit, unless you call 20,000ish players after a year of being out for xbox’s biggest franchise ever healthy, then…ok. Come on man… I don’t even need to put links up as a simple Google search will give you all the information you need to know. It dropped like a rock in a few weeks, and it just free falled from there.

People can like Halo 4 all they want, but there is no denying that overall, it did not do well in SO many areas. You know what, nevermind, I will put a link up as I remember they do a good job at explaining Halo 4 life the first 12 months.

First 12 months of halo 4

1216

> 2533274985217820;1213:
> I’m all for classic movement as long as we get sprint and clamber.

That’s an oxymoron

1217
  • No Sprint - Higher Base movement Speed - Keep movement based spartan abilities (thrust/clamber) - remove offensive spartan abilities (spartan charge)
1218

Halo: Reach has a nice option to use sprint or not. Sprint didn’t effect map sizes either unlike Halo 5’s Sprint. Maybe dial the speed of sprint down or have it duration based like in Reach. Sprint should be an option. If it isn’t in Matchmaking.

1219

> 2533274857227878;1217:
> - No Sprint - Higher Base movement Speed - Keep movement based spartan abilities (thrust/clamber) - remove offensive spartan abilities (spartan charge)

I agree. Sprint and clamber affect gameplay, but I feel like they are less spamable and more balanced. The spartan charge and ground pound can be really annoying.

1220

> 2533274841139340;1204:
> I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate. Every time I go back and play Halo 2 and 3, although I still enjoy them I definitely feel how archaic their gameplay has become.

Doom (2016) says hi.

Anyway, about the topic. I wouldn’t mind sprint at all. Just make it have a stamina limit and remove spartan abilities/jet boosters and I’m all good. I would also really like it if they added back Armor abilities and powerups from the previous games.

1221

> 2533274977253120;1220:
> > 2533274841139340;1204:
> > I think people need to except that Halo and gaming as a whole as moved past this style of gameplay. If Halo Infinite came out and it played like Halo 2 or 3 it wouldn’t survive in the modern gaming climate. Every time I go back and play Halo 2 and 3, although I still enjoy them I definitely feel how archaic their gameplay has become.
>
> Doom (2016) says hi.
>
> Anyway, about the topic. I wouldn’t mind sprint at all. Just make it have a stamina limit and remove spartan abilities/jet boosters and I’m all good. I would also really like it if they added back Armor abilities and powerups from the previous games.

Clearly people like moobleshmib haven’t played any shooters other than Halo, CoD, Titanfall, Destiny, or Fortnite. That’d explain their lack of knowing of DOOM’s success. 343i could takes notes, tho… classic gameplay comebacks DO sell. A lot.