The sprint discussion thread

Games Halo 5: Guardians
15266

> 2533274825830455;15263:
> > 2533274875084332;15262:
> > I know these surveys try to gauge what the fanbase want, but even those who say they want Halo 3 style game is not good enough. It had projectile based weapons, a nightmare for regional players online (especially in peer to peer networking…shudders), even to this day, when I replay Halo 3 I cannot adapt to the BR. This alone kills Halo 3 for me. Surveys may show what people “want” but that does not mean it is correct, as many opinions are misinformed, whether they want classic Halo or 343 style halo. The problem is people saying they want something without realising its effect on the game. As highlighted with projectile weapons, and all around us in this sprint thread. Both sides have this problem.
>
> That’s unreasonably harsh. Who are you to tell other people that what they want is wrong? Do you hold an authority on what Halo should be?
>
> People can be uninformed, but they always know what they like. Have you ever considered that perhaps not everyone carries the same standards? Sure, someone might know how sprint affects the game, but so what? They’re just effects, neither bad nor good without someone prescribing them that quality, and the prescription will vary from person to person. When people say they want something, they may not know how it affects the game, but they do know how it feels. And if it’s fun for them, who cares how it affecs the game?

“And if it’s fun for them, who cares how it affecs the game?”

Great. Then lets have unlimited nades and ammo, and random weapon drops because people “feel” it is fun. I am not talking feelings here. How can something like projectile weapons be described as good in an online game? It has been proved in many videos showing their inconsistency, worsening when online (shows variance even on LAN, with targets standing still during the test). Examples include the BR taking between 4-7 bursts on the target even when stationary. Things like that have nothing to do with feelings when they are factually effecting the gameplay experience in a random way. How can that be good, especially in a competitive setting? People say they like projectile weapons, but I am sure if I show any of them the videos or sit them in splitscreen and test it in front of them, I am sure their opinion will change after they see the random effect.

Another Example, someone says they want sprint in Halo because it makes them “feel” fast, yet little do they know maps are stretched out to accommodate it, and a simple 10% speed boost buff in Halo 3 was enough to bring up the pace. People dont always know what they like until they try the alternatives, opinions are never set in stone. How do you know their opinion wont be changed when they are shown how their ideas effect the gameplay, in ways they did not know? Why should everything revolve around feelings rather than testing said changes to ensure it is as modular as possible and works in both competitive and casual environments, like Halo used to be designed?

15267

> 2533274875084332;15266:
> > 2533274825830455;15263:
> > > 2533274875084332;15262:
> > > I know these surveys try to gauge what the fanbase want, but even those who say they want Halo 3 style game is not good enough. It had projectile based weapons, a nightmare for regional players online (especially in peer to peer networking…shudders), even to this day, when I replay Halo 3 I cannot adapt to the BR. This alone kills Halo 3 for me. Surveys may show what people “want” but that does not mean it is correct, as many opinions are misinformed, whether they want classic Halo or 343 style halo. The problem is people saying they want something without realising its effect on the game. As highlighted with projectile weapons, and all around us in this sprint thread. Both sides have this problem.
> >
> > That’s unreasonably harsh. Who are you to tell other people that what they want is wrong? Do you hold an authority on what Halo should be?
> >
> > People can be uninformed, but they always know what they like. Have you ever considered that perhaps not everyone carries the same standards? Sure, someone might know how sprint affects the game, but so what? They’re just effects, neither bad nor good without someone prescribing them that quality, and the prescription will vary from person to person. When people say they want something, they may not know how it affects the game, but they do know how it feels. And if it’s fun for them, who cares how it affecs the game?
>
> “And if it’s fun for them, who cares how it affecs the game?”
>
> Great. Then lets have unlimited nades and ammo, and random weapon drops because people “feel” it is fun. I am not talking feelings here. How can something like projectile weapons be described as good in an online game? It has been proved in many videos showing their inconsistency, worsening when online (shows variance even on LAN, with targets standing still during the test). Examples include the BR taking between 4-7 bursts on the target even when stationary. Things like that have nothing to do with feelings when they are factually effecting the gameplay experience in a random way. How can that be good, especially in a competitive setting? People say they like projectile weapons, but I am sure if I show any of them the videos or sit them in splitscreen and test it in front of them, I am sure their opinion will change after they see the random effect.
>
> Another Example, someone says they want sprint in Halo because it makes them “feel” fast, yet little do they know maps are stretched out to accommodate it, and a simple 10% speed boost buff in Halo 3 was enough to bring up the pace. People dont always know what they like until they try the alternatives, opinions are never set in stone. How do you know their opinion wont be changed when they are shown how their ideas effect the gameplay, in ways they did not know? Why should everything revolve around feelings rather than testing said changes to ensure it is as modular as possible and works in both competitive and casual environments, like Halo used to be designed?

are you mixing up hit scan based shooting and projectile based shooting? Hit scan would be the one where players need to lead with their shots (like in H3, however H3 also had awful netcoding to its setup). Projectile should hit anything in its path directly. Regarding this, I’m more of a fan of hitscan IF it’s done right. I can name various games that never did it right from H3, Fortnite, certain battlefield games to many others. At that point projectile would be better if hitscan won’t fit for said game. Why do I prefer hitscan? (So long as it works) it’s perfect for competitive gaming, the great players will lead their shots and show a true understanding of the weapons, lesser players will miss some every now and then. It’s more of a preference thing to me. Some like to lead shots, others want to just straight up hit the target directly with no hassle.

I also understand what youre you’re getting at when saying players don’t always know what they want. It’s why developers don’t incorporate every single thing a gamer wants as some things work and some don’t. A gamer may ask for a feature in a specific way but the developer does it in a different way. To keep to sprint, players want faster gameplay which would be achieved if sprint was engaged all the time but it isn’t. Instead you’re constantly disengaging it which slows you down when you enter an engagement vs another player. So if players want fast paced gameplay, up the BMS 30% as an example where you can still move and shoot at the same time, in this instance you’re not disengaging your movements and you’re still combat effective at the same time. What if one doesn’t care about the fast paced gameplay but the “immersion” sprint adds? We know how sprint makes your Spartans huff and puff when sprinting, and how the camera slightly shakes when doing so, can that not be applied to a high BMS as well? Would it still feel realistic? In the older halo games your thumb stick dictated your speed. Slightly push it and your spartan walked, slightly move it more and you did a jogging pace, push the thumbstick all the way and you was running at full speed aka sprinting. Simply apply the effects when the thumbstick is pushed all the way to sprint with the BMS.

15268

> 2533274875084332;15266:
> How do you know their opinion wont be changed when they are shown how their ideas effect the gameplay, in ways they did not know?

I don’t claim that people’s opinions can’t be changed. They certainly do change. My intention was just to comment on the authoritative tone of your post. It might have been unintentional, but it came off as if you had all the answers for how to improve Halo, and everyone who disagreed with you in the survey is wrong. You’re essentially asserting no one who disagrees with you on these issues has weighted the pros and cons carefully.

> 2533274875084332;15266:
> Why should everything revolve around feelings rather than testing said changes to ensure it is as modular as possible and works in both competitive and casual environments, like Halo used to be designed?

It’s easy enough to speak altruistically as long as you can imagine that the most altruistic decision wouldn’t go against your personal preferences. It’s easy to say “oh, just ensure that everything works in both competitive and casual environments”, but the reality is that many things don’t. It’s not just that casual and competitive players might have contradictory ideas of what makes the game fun, but that in both groups there will be people with contradictory ideas. Any design decision you make will be guaranteed to leave someone unhappy, but who will it be? If you want the decision that leaves the most people happy, you’re back at majority rule.

You’re going by your feelings just as much as anyone else. Now, in case of the examples you were using—projectile weapons and sprint—there are enough people that feel the same way that you can feel comfortable making assertions about how bad these mechanics are as if it wasn’t entirely subjective. But all that’s really going on is that you are bothered to some extent by certain things about these mechanics (such as inconsistency of hit registration), and you don’t find enough redeeming value to make you like the mechanic. The only thing that someone needs to do to have a differing opinion is to be less bothered by the botheresome aspects, and find more redeeming value. And how that is possible is based on the fact that people value different things.

15269

> 2533274923562209;15267:
> are you mixing up hit scan based shooting and projectile based shooting? Hit scan would be the one where players need to lead with their shots (like in H3, however H3 also had awful netcoding to its setup). Projectile should hit anything in its path directly.

No, the common usage of the terms is exactly opposite to what you’re suggesting: hitscan weapons hit instantly, projectiles take time (hence called “projectile”, referring to the fact that it’s simulating the flight time of a projectile, rather than just calculating the intersection of a line).

15270

> 2533274923562209;15267:
> > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > > 2533274825830455;15263:
> > > > 2533274875084332;15262:
> > > > I know these surveys try to gauge what the fanbase want, but even those who say they want Halo 3 style game is not good enough. It had projectile based weapons, a nightmare for regional players online (especially in peer to peer networking…shudders), even to this day, when I replay Halo 3 I cannot adapt to the BR. This alone kills Halo 3 for me. Surveys may show what people “want” but that does not mean it is correct, as many opinions are misinformed, whether they want classic Halo or 343 style halo. The problem is people saying they want something without realising its effect on the game. As highlighted with projectile weapons, and all around us in this sprint thread. Both sides have this problem.
>
> are you mixing up hit scan based shooting and projectile based shooting? Hit scan would be the one where players need to lead with their shots (like in H3, however H3 also had awful netcoding to its setup). Projectile should hit anything in its path directly.

I think you are confused about the difference between the two. Hitscan weapons simulate weapon firing by reducing the time between trigger pull and target hit to zero, making it an instantaneos shot. No leading is required for hitscan-type weapons; wherever you aim is where the shot will hit. It can be summed up in a simple if-then statement: if target is in path of aim, then apply damage. Projectile weapons in games more accurately simulate how bullets fire in the real world, by turning the bullet into an object in the game that is then affected by the physics engine. Projectile-based weapons have travel time of the bullet, so there is time between when the trigger is pulled to when the target is hit, just like real life. For projectile based weapons, you must lead your shots if a target is far away or moving, because if you aim where they are then they could theoretically move before the bullet reaches them. In online gaming, hitscan is more reliable because there are less things that can be affected by the inconsistencies of network communication; it’s just your gun and your target. Projectile weapons add a new variable, since the projectile becomes its own object in the game world; any number of network issues could affect the bullet object just as they would affect the player. However, some people like projectile weapons in games because it feels more realistic and immersive.

15271

> 2533274825830455;15269:
> > 2533274923562209;15267:
> > are you mixing up hit scan based shooting and projectile based shooting? Hit scan would be the one where players need to lead with their shots (like in H3, however H3 also had awful netcoding to its setup). Projectile should hit anything in its path directly.
>
> No, the common usage of the terms is exactly opposite to what you’re suggesting: hitscan weapons hit instantly, projectiles take time (hence called “projectile”, referring to the fact that it’s simulating the flight time of a projectile, rather than just calculating the intersection of a line).

> 2533274817408735;15270:
> > 2533274923562209;15267:
> > > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > > > 2533274825830455;15263:
> > > > > 2533274875084332;15262:
> > > > > I know these surveys try to gauge what the fanbase want, but even those who say they want Halo 3 style game is not good enough. It had projectile based weapons, a nightmare for regional players online (especially in peer to peer networking…shudders), even to this day, when I replay Halo 3 I cannot adapt to the BR. This alone kills Halo 3 for me. Surveys may show what people “want” but that does not mean it is correct, as many opinions are misinformed, whether they want classic Halo or 343 style halo. The problem is people saying they want something without realising its effect on the game. As highlighted with projectile weapons, and all around us in this sprint thread. Both sides have this problem.
> >
> > are you mixing up hit scan based shooting and projectile based shooting? Hit scan would be the one where players need to lead with their shots (like in H3, however H3 also had awful netcoding to its setup). Projectile should hit anything in its path directly.
>
> I think you are confused about the difference between the two. Hitscan weapons simulate weapon firing by reducing the time between trigger pull and target hit to zero, making it an instantaneos shot. No leading is required for hitscan-type weapons; wherever you aim is where the shot will hit. It can be summed up in a simple if-then statement: if target is in path of aim, then apply damage. Projectile weapons in games more accurately simulate how bullets fire in the real world, by turning the bullet into an object in the game that is then affected by the physics engine. Projectile-based weapons have travel time of the bullet, so there is time between when the trigger is pulled to when the target is hit, just like real life. For projectile based weapons, you must lead your shots if a target is far away or moving, because if you aim where they are then they could theoretically move before the bullet reaches them. In online gaming, hitscan is more reliable because there are less things that can be affected by the inconsistencies of network communication; it’s just your gun and your target. Projectile weapons add a new variable, since the projectile becomes its own object in the game world; any number of network issues could affect the bullet object just as they would affect the player. However, some people like projectile weapons in games because it feels more realistic and immersive.

I can see I myself had the two backwards then. I was under the impression hitscan meant leading shots and projectile the opposite just based off what I’ve seen on waypoint but I’d then say they too have it backwards, I never actually looked it up myself to learn them in depth.

Nevertheless I guess I just switch the words and my point stands on my preference for projectile over hitscan then, barring the projectile setup isn’t a mess on net codes or any interference to it.

so I then take it those saying halo 3 was hitscan based is wrong? As I see/saw a lot saying it was. Or was only certain weapons that way?

15272

> 2533274875084332;15266:
> How can something like projectile weapons be described as good in an online game? It has been proved in many videos showing their inconsistency, worsening when online (shows variance even on LAN, with targets standing still during the test). Examples include the BR taking between 4-7 bursts on the target even when stationary.

That’s not a projectile vs hitscan problem. That’s a BR exclusive thing. All projectile scan means is that the bullet has a unit of time between it leaving the gun and it hitting the target. It doesn’t directly affect the actual gun. A Rocket Launcher, by design, is always a projectile scan weapon. Making that hitscan turns it into an explosive railgun with no charge up.

Halo 3’s BR specifically has a random shot mechanic where only the first shot in a burst is directly on the center of the reticle, but the second and third shot may be anywhere inside the reticle. This is to limit the BR’s effectiveness at longer ranges. Basically, trying to prevent Halo 5’s BR pre-patch.

15273

> 2533274923562209;15271:
> so I then take it those saying halo 3 was hitscan based is wrong? As I see/saw a lot saying it was. Or was only certain weapons that way?

Either they are confused about Halo 3, or they’re confused about the terminology. I haven’t personally ran into this confusion before, so it’s hard for me to say. I couldn’t confirm whether Halo 3 actually has travel time on all weapons if pressed, but certainly the usual BR, AR, and the like have.

15274

> 2533274875084332;15262:
> Respectfully, surveys like this are pointless. All the people who quit Halo after 4, such as almost everyone I know. Did they know about the survey? No.

I don’t think anyone would argue that these type of surveys don’t represent the entire population, but it is note worthy that four different communities have a lot of similar opinions about Halo and the direction it should go.

15275

> 2533274833081329;15272:
> > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > How can something like projectile weapons be described as good in an online game? It has been proved in many videos showing their inconsistency, worsening when online (shows variance even on LAN, with targets standing still during the test). Examples include the BR taking between 4-7 bursts on the target even when stationary.
>
> That’s not a projectile vs hitscan problem. That’s a BR exclusive thing. All projectile scan means is that the bullet has a unit of time between it leaving the gun and it hitting the target. It doesn’t directly affect the actual gun. A Rocket Launcher, by design, is always a projectile scan weapon. Making that hitscan turns it into an explosive railgun with no charge up.
>
> Halo 3’s BR specifically has a random shot mechanic where only the first shot in a burst is directly on the center of the reticle, but the second and third shot may be anywhere inside the reticle. This is to limit the BR’s effectiveness at longer ranges. Basically, trying to prevent Halo 5’s BR pre-patch.

I should have explained it further. My point was that it is a problem even at medium ranges. At long ranges it is fine, as without it, the BR indeed would be OP. A rocket launcher of course must stay projectile, but based on what we see in halo 3, I think BR’s should stay hitscan but reduce their accuracy beyond medium range. As projectile has further issues when you consider internet connections (some tests ive seen show bursts that hit the target not even registering damage on the opponent). If I could find that video I will edit with a link.

> 2533274825830455;15268:
> > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > How do you know their opinion wont be changed when they are shown how their ideas effect the gameplay, in ways they did not know?
>
> I don’t claim that people’s opinions can’t be changed. They certainly do change. My intention was just to comment on the authoritative tone of your post. It might have been unintentional, but it came off as if you had all the answers for how to improve Halo, and everyone who disagreed with you in the survey is wrong. You’re essentially asserting no one who disagrees with you on these issues has weighted the pros and cons carefully.
>
> > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > Why should everything revolve around feelings rather than testing said changes to ensure it is as modular as possible and works in both competitive and casual environments, like Halo used to be designed?
>
> It’s easy enough to speak altruistically as long as you can imagine that the most altruistic decision wouldn’t go against your personal preferences. It’s easy to say “oh, just ensure that everything works in both competitive and casual environments”, but the reality is that many things don’t. It’s not just that casual and competitive players might have contradictory ideas of what makes the game fun, but that in both groups there will be people with contradictory ideas. Any design decision you make will be guaranteed to leave someone unhappy, but who will it be? If you want the decision that leaves the most people happy, you’re back at majority rule.
>
> You’re going by your feelings just as much as anyone else. Now, in case of the examples you were using—projectile weapons and sprint—there are enough people that feel the same way that you can feel comfortable making assertions about how bad these mechanics are as if it wasn’t entirely subjective. But all that’s really going on is that you are bothered to some extent by certain things about these mechanics (such as inconsistency of hit registration), and you don’t find enough redeeming value to make you like the mechanic. The only thing that someone needs to do to have a differing opinion is to be less bothered by the botheresome aspects, and find more redeeming value. And how that is possible is based on the fact that people value different things.

I made it clear before that the problem is on both sides, my examples were just the easiest to outline my point.

Going off my feelings? Not at all, I state why a certain change effects gameplay and back it up with what I know/tests explaining it. If I were basing everything on feelings I would just easily say sprinting feels wrong in Halo and thats it. How is it subjective when you have clear shots landing on the opponent, not registering as damage? How can that be subjective? In pursuit of fairness, which should be a core value to us all, such an effect is unfair. Lets say you have 10 duels with a player (lets say splitscreen to remove connection issues), always at the same range, standing still. Whoever wins wont have the better aim, it will be whoever got the better luck with the spread (yes I have tested this myself-in offline). I understand your point on something like sprint, thats fair enough depending on the arguement. But I cant see it for random registration. I get it does have positives, but based on what I’ve seen in many tests there is no doubt negatives outweigh them.

On point of competitive/casual, we make a core gameplay that is simple, and ensures map design is as free as possible (i.e classic gameplay). Then the competitive and casual playlists can have their own modifications to it. Much like how HCS playlists have their own versions of maps or gameplay, or like how MLG playlists in Halo 3 had different settings. Having a basic foundation that is able to be modified to suit anyone is why Halo 3 was so popular (i.e big community in customs). We could even have armour abilities switched on or off (these abilities will be “nerfed” or removed, to suit the maps, rather than maps being cut/modified to suit abilities) for maps in the casual playlist (just for fun).

The problem with Halo 5 is, the maps are forced to fit the gameplay. Which is why we see repetitive map design in Halo 5, while Halo 3 had a lot of variation in its maps. Sure, we could use classic maps with Halo 5 gameplay, but then it will be chaotic (like reach but worse-i.e energy sword +sprint on sword base…). So, imo, maps should be designed based on classic gameplay. Then depending on each map, have different abilities suiting each one (they could even be map pickups as opposed to spawning with them-like equipment in H3). There are many interesting things we can do with a classic foundation, we are limiting Halo’s potential if we stick with spawning with enhanced mobility.

15276

> 2533274809797405;15264:
> Simple, Remaster Halo 3 and add sprint. That will solve it

Don’t say that boy, ad sprint in a classic game is a risky movement, but I’m scared about halo 3 anniversary, what if one day the remaster happens an they put microtransactions on it :frowning:

15277

> 2533274817408735;15270:
> However, some people like projectile weapons in games because it feels more realistic and immersive.

Just swooping in for a seccond because letting this go uncommented would give me a headache: no, some people may like projectile due to it’s precived immersion but it’s definitely not the only reason to favor projectile over hitscan, actually, I haven’t seen any Halo player using immersion as an arguement for projectile. I’d say the biggest plus for projectile is how it affects gameplay and firefights. As you mentioned, projectile requeres a player to lead depending on the distance of a firefight, making the weapon harder to use and therefore allowing for a potentially greater killing power, while keeping the average TTK rather high due to “internal differentiation” without making aiming super hard (such as no AimAssist/magnetism/etc.) or having to fall back on random spread (which makes weapons feel unreliable -> H3 BR).

15278

> 2533274795123910;15265:
> > 2533274809797405;15264:
> > Simple, Remaster Halo 3 and add sprint. That will solve it
>
> Solve what exactly??

Solve nothing, It was sarcasm

15279

> 2533274875084332;15275:
> > 2533274833081329;15272:
> > > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > > How can something like projectile weapons be described as good in an online game? It has been proved in many videos showing their inconsistency, worsening when online (shows variance even on LAN, with targets standing still during the test). Examples include the BR taking between 4-7 bursts on the target even when stationary.
> >
> > That’s not a projectile vs hitscan problem. That’s a BR exclusive thing. All projectile scan means is that the bullet has a unit of time between it leaving the gun and it hitting the target. It doesn’t directly affect the actual gun. A Rocket Launcher, by design, is always a projectile scan weapon. Making that hitscan turns it into an explosive railgun with no charge up.
> >
> > Halo 3’s BR specifically has a random shot mechanic where only the first shot in a burst is directly on the center of the reticle, but the second and third shot may be anywhere inside the reticle. This is to limit the BR’s effectiveness at longer ranges. Basically, trying to prevent Halo 5’s BR pre-patch.
>
> I should have explained it further. My point was that it is a problem even at medium ranges. At long ranges it is fine, as without it, the BR indeed would be OP. A rocket launcher of course must stay projectile, but based on what we see in halo 3, I think BR’s should stay hitscan but reduce their accuracy beyond medium range. As projectile has further issues when you consider internet connections (some tests ive seen show bursts that hit the target not even registering damage on the opponent). If I could find that video I will edit with a link.

As evidenced by CE, quake 3 and the newer soldier 76 / mccree in overwatch (or even pubg) projectile is perfectly fine, in halo 3 your point about not being able to hit at mid range and firing 4-7 bursts on stationary targets is due to 2 factors

  1. BR spread - outside of close range the spread on the H3 BR was uncontrollable and could fire anywhere in the reticule, i can’t remember the values but the first bullet was placed within (E.g.) 30%(space to the middle of reticule), 2nd 60% and 3rd 100% of the available reticule space, this was the leading factor for the innaccuracy
  2. bullet speed - the bullets in the h3 BR were slow so mid range fighting and further became even more tedious when moving targets would move and distance and spread randomness were factored in.

Making a precision rifle more inaccurate is the least ideal outcome and should never be a consideration, no matter the range.

Also halo 3 had garbage code and it was very easy to get bloodshots on LAN, something nowhere as common in the other games, just had poor hit registry across the board, it should never be seen as the staple or a subject in general. Matchmaking also isn’t peer to peer anymore and both internet, processors and netcode aren’t as bad as it was in 2007.

The goal should be to create a pinpoint accurate gun as the utility rifle, with a quick enough kill time, it should be projectile but with a quick bullet speed so it punishes fighting at long distance and being a moving target (a better non-random but similar solution to the reticle bloom reach attempted), the jack of all trades master of none, its prominence weakened by a diverse, abundant and well situated weapon, items (power-ups, nades and on-map abilities) and transport (gravlifts, teleporters, conveyor belts, vehicles) system.

15280

> 2533274836395701;15279:
> > 2533274875084332;15275:
> > > 2533274833081329;15272:
> > > > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > > > How can something like projectile weapons be described as good in an online game? It has been proved in many videos showing their inconsistency, worsening when online (shows variance even on LAN, with targets standing still during the test). Examples include the BR taking between 4-7 bursts on the target even when stationary.
> > >
> > > That’s not a projectile vs hitscan problem. That’s a BR exclusive thing. All projectile scan means is that the bullet has a unit of time between it leaving the gun and it hitting the target. It doesn’t directly affect the actual gun. A Rocket Launcher, by design, is always a projectile scan weapon. Making that hitscan turns it into an explosive railgun with no charge up.
> > >
> > > Halo 3’s BR specifically has a random shot mechanic where only the first shot in a burst is directly on the center of the reticle, but the second and third shot may be anywhere inside the reticle. This is to limit the BR’s effectiveness at longer ranges. Basically, trying to prevent Halo 5’s BR pre-patch.
> >
> > I should have explained it further. My point was that it is a problem even at medium ranges. At long ranges it is fine, as without it, the BR indeed would be OP. A rocket launcher of course must stay projectile, but based on what we see in halo 3, I think BR’s should stay hitscan but reduce their accuracy beyond medium range. As projectile has further issues when you consider internet connections (some tests ive seen show bursts that hit the target not even registering damage on the opponent). If I could find that video I will edit with a link.
>
> As evidenced by CE, quake 3 and the newer soldier 76 / mccree in overwatch (or even pubg) projectile is perfectly fine, in halo 3 your point about not being able to hit at mid range and firing 4-7 bursts on stationary targets is due to 2 factors
> 1. BR spread - outside of close range the spread on the H3 BR was uncontrollable and could fire anywhere in the reticule, i can’t remember the values but the first bullet was placed within (E.g.) 30%(space to the middle of reticule), 2nd 60% and 3rd 100% of the available reticule space, this was the leading factor for the innaccuracy
> 2. bullet speed - the bullets in the h3 BR were slow so mid range fighting and further became even more tedious when moving targets would move and distance and spread randomness were factored in.
>
> Making a precision rifle more inaccurate is the least ideal outcome and should never be a consideration, no matter the range.
>
> Also halo 3 had garbage code and it was very easy to get bloodshots on LAN, something nowhere as common in the other games, just had poor hit registry across the board, it should never be seen as the staple or a subject in general. Matchmaking also isn’t peer to peer anymore and both internet, processors and netcode aren’t as bad as it was in 2007.
>
> The goal should be to create a pinpoint accurate gun as the utility rifle, with a quick enough kill time, it should be projectile but with a quick bullet speed so it punishes fighting at long distance and being a moving target (a better non-random but similar solution to the reticle bloom reach attempted), the jack of all trades master of none, its prominence weakened by a diverse, abundant and well situated weapon, items (power-ups, nades and on-map abilities) and transport (gravlifts, teleporters, conveyor belts, vehicles) system.

Why not just have hitscan then? It seems a lot of work to get the speeds/spread right for projectile to work. I prefer straight up hitscan.

Halo 5 is doing it right, so I dont think a change is necessary. All in all I was just using projectile weapons as an analogy in my original post.

15281

> 2533274875084332;15280:
> > 2533274836395701;15279:
> > > 2533274875084332;15275:
> > > > 2533274833081329;15272:
> > > > > 2533274875084332;15266:
> > > > > How can something like projectile weapons be described as good in an online game? It has been proved in many videos showing their inconsistency, worsening when online (shows variance even on LAN, with targets standing still during the test). Examples include the BR taking between 4-7 bursts on the target even when stationary.
> > > >
> > > > That’s not a projectile vs hitscan problem. That’s a BR exclusive thing. All projectile scan means is that the bullet has a unit of time between it leaving the gun and it hitting the target. It doesn’t directly affect the actual gun. A Rocket Launcher, by design, is always a projectile scan weapon. Making that hitscan turns it into an explosive railgun with no charge up.
> > > >
> > > > Halo 3’s BR specifically has a random shot mechanic where only the first shot in a burst is directly on the center of the reticle, but the second and third shot may be anywhere inside the reticle. This is to limit the BR’s effectiveness at longer ranges. Basically, trying to prevent Halo 5’s BR pre-patch.
> > >
> > > I should have explained it further. My point was that it is a problem even at medium ranges. At long ranges it is fine, as without it, the BR indeed would be OP. A rocket launcher of course must stay projectile, but based on what we see in halo 3, I think BR’s should stay hitscan but reduce their accuracy beyond medium range. As projectile has further issues when you consider internet connections (some tests ive seen show bursts that hit the target not even registering damage on the opponent). If I could find that video I will edit with a link.
> >
> > As evidenced by CE, quake 3 and the newer soldier 76 / mccree in overwatch (or even pubg) projectile is perfectly fine, in halo 3 your point about not being able to hit at mid range and firing 4-7 bursts on stationary targets is due to 2 factors
> > 1. BR spread - outside of close range the spread on the H3 BR was uncontrollable and could fire anywhere in the reticule, i can’t remember the values but the first bullet was placed within (E.g.) 30%(space to the middle of reticule), 2nd 60% and 3rd 100% of the available reticule space, this was the leading factor for the innaccuracy
> > 2. bullet speed - the bullets in the h3 BR were slow so mid range fighting and further became even more tedious when moving targets would move and distance and spread randomness were factored in.
> >
> > Making a precision rifle more inaccurate is the least ideal outcome and should never be a consideration, no matter the range.
> >
> > Also halo 3 had garbage code and it was very easy to get bloodshots on LAN, something nowhere as common in the other games, just had poor hit registry across the board, it should never be seen as the staple or a subject in general. Matchmaking also isn’t peer to peer anymore and both internet, processors and netcode aren’t as bad as it was in 2007.
> >
> > The goal should be to create a pinpoint accurate gun as the utility rifle, with a quick enough kill time, it should be projectile but with a quick bullet speed so it punishes fighting at long distance and being a moving target (a better non-random but similar solution to the reticle bloom reach attempted), the jack of all trades master of none, its prominence weakened by a diverse, abundant and well situated weapon, items (power-ups, nades and on-map abilities) and transport (gravlifts, teleporters, conveyor belts, vehicles) system.
>
> Why not just have hitscan then? It seems a lot of work to get the speeds/spread right for projectile to work. I prefer straight up hitscan.
>
> Halo 5 is doing it right, so I dont think a change is necessary. All in all I was just using projectile weapons as an analogy in my original post.

no i’m saying don’t have spread, in h3 and reach there was no reason to have spread, aside from them deciding to. To see just how unright halo 5 is doing it play a custom game with the movement options off, the shooting mechanics in H5 really aren’t all that flash. My suggestion would offer a skillful solution that isn’t bogged down by the same circumstances we faced over 10 years ago.

While you were using it as an analogy (to describe how people don’t know what they really want), you mentioned that projectile was the inferior choice, by your logic i’m explaining to you how you don’t know what is right as i’m able to explain exactly how projectile weapons can work effectively and better than hitscan.

don’t take it too harshly though, i agree with your other points about halo 5 map design having to accommodate the movement mechanics, that people who are pro-sprint really don’t have a tangible or mechanical or beneficial reason for why it’s needed or that competitive / casual needs to go off the same base

…but this isn’t 2007 anymore, as long as there are good and local servers, and with the increasing quality of internet technology across the globe its become much more feasible to have projectile, as a New Zealand player i can play whoever in overwatch (PC) in local servers and don’t have too many connection problems facing either americans or asians. Compared to never being above 2 bar and laggy when facing anyone outside of NZ/AU in H3 and not overly better for reach, hell even peer to peer would be far more tolerable than 6-7 years ago, especially if the bullet travel time was quick so bullet registry is less affected by lag.

15282

Bungie was gonna put sprint in Halo 2 but thankfully they the cut it because it caused pacing issues. I just wish 343 could actually make a real Halo game without all these Spartan abilities and sprint nonsense.

15283

I rather like sprint, it makes sense that a spartan can run from a tactical and lore standpoint, and it allows people o get certain things done quicker. I think that sprint does have a place in halo, but I also understand that people don’t like it, which is fine, you don’t have to use it in campaign and if there was a classic playlist option than that would help you guys out as well

15284

> 2533274850734574;15283:
> I rather like sprint, it makes sense that a spartan can run from a tactical and lore standpoint, and it allows people o get certain things done quicker. I think that sprint does have a place in halo, but I also understand that people don’t like it, which is fine, you don’t have to use it in campaign and if there was a classic playlist option than that would help you guys out as well

Yeah, but lore shouldn’t affect gameplay.

15285

> 2535416198868046;15284:
> > 2533274850734574;15283:
> > I rather like sprint, it makes sense that a spartan can run from a tactical and lore standpoint, and it allows people o get certain things done quicker. I think that sprint does have a place in halo, but I also understand that people don’t like it, which is fine, you don’t have to use it in campaign and if there was a classic playlist option than that would help you guys out as well
>
> Yeah, but lore shouldn’t affect gameplay.

fair enough, i just put that there because theres a lot of lore buffs who would appreciate it