Too much diversity

Games Other Halo
1

Here is my observation from playlist changes throughout Halo 3, Reach and now the TU changes as well. Stay with me as I discuss Reach and TU below but this is to reflect that I don’t want the same diversity issues causing a lack of consistency with Halo 4.

Essentially there is too much diversity in recent Halo games, updates and playlists. Specifically every time I play a Reach game I don’t feel consistent about my actions. Player and game traits like movement speed, bleed through, rate of bloom etc all contribute to causing confusion while I play.

Further due to the veto system in any given game I could be playing old style original Reach or the TU style changes, that’s without even changing playlist.

Regarding Halo 4 I do NOT want the same diversity to create inconsistency in how the game is played. The separation of matchmaking vs. MLG is more than enough. Anything further simply serves to fracture the gaming experience, population and consistency too much.

Currently I’m not able to just pickup and play knowing how the game is going to behave. While I prefer 90% of the TU changes myself and particularly the maps with overall play speed it’s just too much to handle while in game. Forget about stopping to think should I melee, is bleed through on or off, was it 4 shots or 5 with the DMR etc.

Halo 4 needs less diversity in the game mechanics and player traits.

While I agree and thank 343i for the TU updates and continued playlist changes the system is too diverse. Please take this Reach TU/playlist time as a learning experience and deliver the “best of breed” game mechanics and players traits into a single (or MM vs. MLG split) feature-set of consistent and predictable gameplay.

It will lead to retained population, improved skill, less randonmness feeling etc etc.

2

I agree, i realy want a happy-medium between the casual and competitive sides of halo. It just feels like anytime i switch a playlist, that im not even playing the same game i was 5 minutes ago. There fore i get stuck in 1 playlist (almost ironic, isnt it?)

3

There’s no such thing as too much diversity.

4

I think they should create fewer playlists, but each playlist should have more diversity.

Action Sack : supports every casual players needs. Racing, rocket race, mini-games, infection, more " casual" fighting ( i.e.: only having grenade launchers),etc

BTB : Includes snipers ( no need for a snipers playlist ) , community submitted maps, objective , etc

and so on…

5

> There’s no such thing as too much diversity.

Incorrect, that is the reason Reach playlists are empty so often. It was the same thing in the later days of Halo 3 playlists.

Things got too diverse trying to cater to everybody. It results in games not being found, long matchmaking times and inconsistent game mechanics game after game.

In terms of game mechanics and player traits you have to set rules to make the sandbox work. Imagine every player boosting their shields, run speed, aiming accuracy, damage dealt…oh wait it’s COD again.

Let me guess you like COD, don’t you. I prefer the even playing field of Halo classic.

6

> > There’s no such thing as too much diversity.
>
> Incorrect, that is the reason Reach playlists are empty so often. It was the same thing in the later days of Halo 3 playlists.
>
> Things got too diverse trying to cater to everybody. It results in games not being found, long matchmaking times and inconsistent game mechanics game after game.
>
> In terms of game mechanics and player traits you have to set rules to make the sandbox work. Imagine every player boosting their shields, run speed, aiming accuracy, damage dealt…oh wait it’s COD again.
>
> Let me guess you like COD, don’t you. I prefer the even playing field of Halo classic.

I simply adore gross assumptions.

7

> I simply adore gross assumptions.

How about posting with some actual detail next time mate. That’s two posts in and they do nothing to add to discussions. Until your posts accomplish more than spam I’ll treat them with the disdain they deserve. - Edit - Oh I see your history of posts is nothing but one liners. Good day sir.

Back on topic, should game mechanics be diverse or consistent? Personally I prefer consistent gameplay that highlight player skills and actions.

8

> > I simply adore gross assumptions.
>
> How about posting with some actual detail next time mate. That’s two posts in and they do nothing to add to discussions. Until your posts accomplish more than spam I’ll treat them with the disdain they deserve. - Edit - Oh I see your history of posts is nothing but one liners. Good day sir.
>
> Back on topic, should game mechanics be diverse or consistent? Personally I prefer consistent gameplay that highlight player skills and actions.

There’s no need to be rude. I prefer diverse, entertaining gameplay with variety.

9

> I prefer diverse, entertaining gameplay with variety.

Not one for details are you? If you post such generic answers I’d rather you don’t post.

So you like going into games and having different rates of fire, faster and slower bloom rates and different shield effects all in the same game? You like your grenade damage to be different in game 1 to game 2 in the same playlist?

Perhaps if you provide some details things would be clearer. At this point I’m assuming your talking about varied maps and weapons but not paying close enough detail to my original post nuance.

10

I completely disagree, you people won’t give up, will you? Incredibly selfish to the end?

If there is too much diversity, let’s get rid of MLG.

The actual MLG competitions are LAN anyway, the playlist is not even used by the company itself.

You see? It is not too much diversity, it is that you don’t like other people having fun in playlists, or the play lists themselves.

As many game types and play lists should be available, there is no such thing as too much diversity.

11

That is my no.1 fear for Halo 4 mate. Too much diversity = confusion. Then Halo will just become another COD style game. Too many perks and changes to the game-play is what makes me dislike COD over Halo. Anyway, back on topic Halo is VERY well known for is simplistic game-play (1 type of weapon for each class, little/no perks in game-play) which is what makes Halo a more skillful game to play—the odds are almost all the time even, just how I like it;)

12

> > I prefer diverse, entertaining gameplay with variety.
>
> Not one for details are you? If you post such generic answers I’d rather you don’t post.
>
> So you like going into games and having different rates of fire, faster and slower bloom rates and different shield effects all in the same game? You like your grenade damage to be different in game 1 to game 2 in the same playlist?
>
> Perhaps if you provide some details things would be clearer. At this point I’m assuming your talking about varied maps and weapons but not paying close enough detail to my original post nuance.

Not one for respect are you? I’d post more details if I felt like it; which I don’t because I don’t care enough. Your blatant hostility is irritating me, so I suppose I’ll accede to your wishes.

13

> That is my no.1 fear for Halo 4 mate. Too much diversity = confusion. Then Halo will just become another COD style game. Too many perks and changes to the game-play is what makes me dislike COD over Halo. Anyway, back on topic Halo is VERY well known for is simplistic game-play (1 type of weapon for each class, little/no perks in game-play) which is what makes Halo a more skillful game to play—the odds are almost all the time even, just how I like it;)

Diversity has nothing to do with perks and killstreaks.

Having more game types is taking advantage of Forge, making game types and game modes.

Although I agree there should be less play lists, having less variety is basically going backwards.

We should keep all the default play lists, along with the really popular ones such as Living Dead, and finally the community ones such as Grifball and MLG, who have followings and websites dedicated to it.

Halo has always had a large number of game modes, COD is only adding more. COD didn’t invent video games, I think people should stop acting as if it did, because even Frankie said, COD does some things beautifully.

Having more, fun game types isn’t a bad thing, it will only increase the following to the game.

14

To be honest, I don’t enjoy a game trying to cater for everyone by having multiple playlists that play very differently from eachother. I thought I would return to Reach for the Anniversary playlists, but I didn’t. This was because I didn’t enjoy the fact that all my fun would’ve been restricted into a small part of matchmaking.

What this community is unification. Making hundreds of different playlists isn’t the right way to gather to everybody, making an universal gameplay style that majority of people can enjoy is. Surely, there will always be someone who doesn’t like it, but in all honesty, it’s their own loss. I wouldn’t mind being that person as long as I knew that the rest of the community is more united.

Uniting the community would give us less playlist variety, and therefore more players per playlist. Thus having better connection quality in games and more even matches in regards to skill. In the end it would lead to a better gameplay experience for everyone.

15

> To be honest, I don’t enjoy a game trying to cater for everyone by having multiple playlists that play very differently from eachother. I thought I would return to Reach for the Anniversary playlists, but I didn’t. This was because I didn’t enjoy the fact that all my fun would’ve been restricted into a small part of matchmaking.
>
> What this community is unification. Making hundreds of different playlists isn’t the right way to gather to everybody, making an universal gameplay style that majority of people can enjoy is. Surely, there will always be someone who doesn’t like it, but in all honesty, it’s their own loss. I wouldn’t mind being that person as long as I knew that the rest of the community is more united.
>
> Uniting the community would give us less playlist variety, and therefore more players per playlist. Thus having better connection quality in games and more even matches in regards to skill. In the end it would lead to a better gameplay experience for everyone.

I don’t agree, this universal style you talk about will never work, more variety the better. More play lists is different, but we still need a lot of game modes.

If there should be a universal play list, why not keep Living Dead? It is the most popular, the most logical reason to keep it. Everyone will be forced to play it.

Or Team Slayer.

Will everyone be happy? No.

With more variety, more people can find something that suits them. As long as you are able to find your own playlist, it should not be a problem, and Reach has an excellent net code.

If you don’t like it, don’t play it, but don’t try to ruin other people’s fun because one pixel of number on the screen is somehow annoying you in a completely different play list.

16

A few replies are commenting that diversity should stay. What you are not reading into is I am NOT saying get rid of variety.

Variety is good, gameplay diversity is good but when the game and weapon mechanics are altered almost every game you play, the diversity in that respect of the game creates inconsistent gameplay.

For example keep the majority of playlists but tighten them up. Keep MLG, living dead and Grifball etc. When did I ever say to get rid of those?

The aspects I’m speaking are of damage, bloom, melee and movement speeds. As I posted originally I believe it a good thing to keep MLG with it’s set of game mechanics but the rest of matchmaking should be one uniform 343i set of game mechanics.

From that base keep diverse playlists such as objective, invasion, slayer, BTB etc. But tighten it up so the population and skill matching numbers are there.

I hope that clears things up a little and future replies are more on the money in terms of understanding the comments on diversity.

17

> A few replies are commenting that diversity should stay. What you are not reading into is I am NOT saying get rid of variety.
>
> Variety is good, gameplay diversity is good but when the game and weapon mechanics are altered almost every game you play, the diversity in that respect of the game creates inconsistent gameplay.
>
> For example keep the majority of playlists but tighten them up. Keep MLG, living dead and Grifball etc. When did I ever say to get rid of those?
>
> The aspects I’m speaking are of damage, bloom, melee and movement speeds. As I posted originally I believe it a good thing to keep MLG with it’s set of game mechanics but the rest of matchmaking should be one uniform 343i set of game mechanics.
>
> From that base keep diverse playlists such as objective, invasion, slayer, BTB etc. But tighten it up so the population and skill matching numbers are there.
>
> I hope that clears things up a little and future replies are more on the money in terms of understanding the comments on diversity.

Ok, I misunderstood you OP, I agree, less play lists is good, but don’t get rid of the important ones.

More game modes can be put into playlists.

18

> Not one for respect are you? I’d post more details if I felt like it; which I don’t because I don’t care enough. Your blatant hostility is irritating me, so I suppose I’ll accede to your wishes.

I’ve not been disrespectful at all mate. I even took the time to ask some questions of you, of which you’ve provided no detailed answers or insights to your comments or reasons behind them. You just keep posting off-topic -Yoink!--for-tat spam.

I’m not hostile in the slightest and I have now blocked all your posts on Waypoint, sorry but for me you have nothing of value to contribute. I’ll no longer see anything from you on these forums.

19

i just wish they didn’t require all the maps to play all the playlists

20

> I don’t agree, this universal style you talk about will never work, more variety the better. More play lists is different, but we still need a lot of game modes.
>
> If there should be a universal play list, why not keep Living Dead? It is the most popular, the most logical reason to keep it. Everyone will be forced to play it.
>
> Or Team Slayer.
>
> Will everyone be happy? No.
>
> With more variety, more people can find something that suits them. As long as you are able to find your own playlist, it should not be a problem, and Reach has an excellent net code.
>
> If you don’t like it, don’t play it, but don’t try to ruin other people’s fun because one pixel of number on the screen is somehow annoying you in a completely different play list.

By universal playstyle I mean not having hundreds of different types of Slayer gametypes, all with different settings. Loads of playlists that technically have the same purpose, just with slightly different gameplay. I am always fine with special playlists such as Infection, Team Snipers, and SWAT. But never did I say that everyone should be forced to play Team Slayer, I only want the Slayer be similar, no matter what non-special playlists I am playing in.

I see this as a case of “more is less, but less is more”. You see, you have a player who likes to play a certain type of gameplay. There is a single playlist for that kind of gameplay, so the player frequents it and never plays other playlists. Eventually the player will get bored because, practicaly, they only have one playlist to play.

But if we instead had only certain type of gameplay, the player could possibly learn to change their preferences, having more options, thus not getting bored as fast. Of course chances are the player didn’t like the universal gameplay at all, ending up quitting the whole game altogether, but trying to gather to everyone is just irrational and doesn’t really work, therefore you just have to let some people go. In the end this creates a more consistent population.

On the other hand, having less of different gameplay styles means less playlists. Which means bigger population per playlist. More players per playlist gives more consistent matchmaking results in regards to connection and skill. Thereby giving better gameplay quality to everyone. Again, leading to more consistent population because people won’t get as easily frustrated with the game.

Remember, I’d be compeltely fine if the universal gameplay wasn’t exactly catered for my needs. Sure, I would be disappointed, but at least I knew that the game would be less cluttered and more enjoyable to the people who play it. Halo is digging its own grave by trying to cater to every single player in the world, I only want that to stop.