I would really like Halo Infinite to get back to roots also weapons and vehicles wise 
I always loved the uniqueness offered by Halo prior to Halo 4 for weapons and vehicles variety!
Halo 4 kind of ruined the sandbox by adding promethean weapons which were almost identical to some UNSC or Covenant weapons, and Halo 5 did normalize it even more with weapons attachments and vehicles variants although the base set for Promethean weapons was modified.
What do you think about it?
There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
Well I think where everything went wrong is in designing the weapon and vehicle pools. In Halo we had two different types of weapons pools, the UNSC which used the very familiar projectile weapons that our current firearms utilize today, while the covenant used energy based weapons with internal batteries and a heat system to replace clips. The exception was the needler but it was given a different mechanic to make it appear more sophisticated than our crude designs. But there you had 2 pools of weapons, UNSC which was complete weapon set and the covenant which was very much a partial set. Neither vehicle poll was completed.
In Halo 2 you added a new poll which was the sentinel beam and now forerunner weapons could be used, although it acted very much like a covenant plasma rifle. The Covenant weapons and vehicle pool was completed while the UNSC still did not have a flying vehicle and the scout vehicle was moved to the next game.
Halo 3 they finally completed the UNSC vehicle pool with a flying weapon and added in a new pool, the brutes, Now the brute weapons were very close to the UNSC and only had extra melee damage to make them different. Neither vehicle or weapons pool was complete but when combined with the covenant weapons pool and even removed some overlaps it was a complete vehicle and weapons pool.
Halo Reach (which I still argue is the best) had a complete weapons and vehicle pool for both UNSC and Covenant. Further more when designing the game they realize that everything was complete so for new weapons they worked on more of a specialist weapon role. It wasn’t a weapons with so much power that ammo had to be extremely limited, but it wasn’t a weapon with so much ammo that it could replace your mainline guns. Not to mention the different pools mirrored each other in a way that fit the asymmetrical balance between the two warring powers.
Enter Halo 4, the Prometheans, Now their weapons acted very much like the Brute and UNSC weapons and they did have a full weapons pool (I will explain later) but no vehicles. Now given that these enemies can just teleport it is reasonable that vehicles don’t suit them as they can instantly pop in from around the world to a different ship. I mean you didn’t see any cars in Star Trek since they had transporter beams (not counting Nemesis which copied so much from Halo).
Halo 5 gave the Prometheans a single flying vehicle and just made powered up variants of the other weapons. Nothing was new except for pay2win Req packs and a vehicle that also included a better one hidden in the lootbox system.
So this is what I call a full weapons pool
Pistol (one handed) - Automatic - Close Quarters - Mid Range - Sniper - Explosive/Anti-vehicle - Grenade (secondary)This is what could be added to the weapons pool
Heavy Pistol (hand cannon) - Akimbo automatic (dual wielding) - Melee (sometimes used in place of close quarters) - Mid-long range - Dual Purpose (anti-infantry and anti light vehicle, like the brute shot and sticky launcher) - Utility (low damage but does have effects such as EMP or concussion, examples are the Reach grenade launcher and concussion rifle) - Guided Explosive - Orbital (the target designator, too bad the covenant doesn’t have one like a cleansing beam from Halo Wars) - Mines/Area Denial (secondary)This is what I would call a complete vehicle pool.
Scout (fast) - Cavalry (carries passengers) - Heavy (tank) - FlyingThis is what could be added to the vehicle pool.
light anti-vehicle - anti-air - transport - aerial transport (not drop ships as I consider them a different category and believe they should remain AI controlled).As I have said before we have 4 different sources for these pools. Only 2 of theses sources make a complete vehicle pool and only 3 has a full weapons pool.
UNSC - Covenant - Brutes - Forerunner/PrometheanNow I made some threads about weapons and vehicles that would incorporate an aesthetic similar to the Flood. But when coming up with that concept it was those complete pools that came into mind. Now there pools don’t need to match each other one for one, example there is no need for a UNSC melee weapon and the Covenant Sword and Brute gravity hammer fill the close quarters role with their melee weapons but the brute still has their mauler. But they do need to fill the basic rolls lifted above and could have the optional roles to fill in the gaps. Now as you see with the other 2 or 3 different sources of weapon and vehicle pools there is plenty of room for 343 to design new weapons. They just have to make sure that the weapons are unique compared to the weapons in the other pool. There is even room for some UNSC and Covenant designs. Of course it would be easier to fill the gaps in the Brute and Promethean weapons (or make a new faction with a complete pool).
Here is an idea for a new utility weapon in the covenant pool. I call it the Plasma Disruptor. It is similar to the grenade launcher form reach, instead it fires those overcharged green plasma pistol bolts. It can fire more bolts than a plasma pistol can fire overcharge. Holding down the trigger doesn’t drain the battery but it does increase the heat so sooner or later you will have to let go. It’s purpose is to break shield/power armor and disable vehicles. Does very little damage to armor/health. Here is one for the Brutes, A Disc Launcher. Supposed to be an anti vehicle weapon it launches spiked disks that can stick to walls or the ground. when it comes into contact with a vehicle or player it explodes. You could use it to lay a quick minefield in a path of a speeding vehicle. The discs will explode after a delayed time (like 30 seconds) but as you see there is an anti-vehicle weapon that is different from a rocker launcher, fuel rod cannon, plasma launcher, spartan laser, yet it fills the same role.
> 2533274819446242;2:
> There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
>
> Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
>
> Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
>
> We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
> 2666640315087182;3:
> Well I think where everything went wrong is in designing the weapon and vehicle pools. In Halo we had two different types of weapons pools, the UNSC which used the very familiar projectile weapons that our current firearms utilize today, while the covenant used energy based weapons with internal batteries and a heat system to replace clips. The exception was the needler but it was given a different mechanic to make it appear more sophisticated than our crude designs. But there you had 2 pools of weapons, UNSC which was complete weapon set and the covenant which was very much a partial set. Neither vehicle poll was completed.
>
> In Halo 2 you added a new poll which was the sentinel beam and now forerunner weapons could be used, although it acted very much like a covenant plasma rifle. The Covenant weapons and vehicle pool was completed while the UNSC still did not have a flying vehicle and the scout vehicle was moved to the next game.
>
> Halo 3 they finally completed the UNSC vehicle pool with a flying weapon and added in a new pool, the brutes, Now the brute weapons were very close to the UNSC and only had extra melee damage to make them different. Neither vehicle or weapons pool was complete but when combined with the covenant weapons pool and even removed some overlaps it was a complete vehicle and weapons pool.
>
> Halo Reach (which I still argue is the best) had a complete weapons and vehicle pool for both UNSC and Covenant. Further more when designing the game they realize that everything was complete so for new weapons they worked on more of a specialist weapon role. It wasn’t a weapons with so much power that ammo had to be extremely limited, but it wasn’t a weapon with so much ammo that it could replace your mainline guns. Not to mention the different pools mirrored each other in a way that fit the asymmetrical balance between the two warring powers.
>
> Enter Halo 4, the Prometheans, Now their weapons acted very much like the Brute and UNSC weapons and they did have a full weapons pool (I will explain later) but no vehicles. Now given that these enemies can just teleport it is reasonable that vehicles don’t suit them as they can instantly pop in from around the world to a different ship. I mean you didn’t see any cars in Star Trek since they had transporter beams (not counting Nemesis which copied so much from Halo).
>
> Halo 5 gave the Prometheans a single flying vehicle and just made powered up variants of the other weapons. Nothing was new except for pay2win Req packs and a vehicle that also included a better one hidden in the lootbox system.
>
> So this is what I call a full weapons pool
> - Pistol (one handed) - Automatic - Close Quarters - Mid Range - Sniper - Explosive/Anti-vehicle - Grenade (secondary)This is what could be added to the weapons pool
> - Heavy Pistol (hand cannon) - Akimbo automatic (dual wielding) - Melee (sometimes used in place of close quarters) - Mid-long range - Dual Purpose (anti-infantry and anti light vehicle, like the brute shot and sticky launcher) - Utility (low damage but does have effects such as EMP or concussion, examples are the Reach grenade launcher and concussion rifle) - Guided Explosive - Orbital (the target designator, too bad the covenant doesn’t have one like a cleansing beam from Halo Wars) - Mines/Area Denial (secondary)This is what I would call a complete vehicle pool.
> - Scout (fast) - Cavalry (carries passengers) - Heavy (tank) - FlyingThis is what could be added to the vehicle pool.
> - light anti-vehicle - anti-air - transport - aerial transport (not drop ships as I consider them a different category and believe they should remain AI controlled).As I have said before we have 4 different sources for these pools. Only 2 of theses sources make a complete vehicle pool and only 3 has a full weapons pool.
> - UNSC - Covenant - Brutes - Forerunner/Promethean
That’s a lot to say about this topic
I would like every faction to have a full weapons and vehicles pull (would like that a lot! I always dreamed to drive a Cyclops!! Or a Locust :D), but maybe as I said above ^ they should vary a little bit between 1:1 equivalents
> 2535441330154481;4:
> > 2533274819446242;2:
> > There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
> >
> > Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
> >
> > Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
> >
> > We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
>
> I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
> I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
Its not as if we can’t fill out the sandbox without clones and its not as if weapons haven’t been cut and replaced before. We can still have say a Sniper Rifle and a Focus Rifle that satisfy the “lore” equivalencies of a long range marksman weapon for UNSC/Covenant respectively while still behaving very differently on a mechanical level. Losing a Beam Rifle that is little more than the sniper rifle, but purple, isn’t really a loss when we could use the Focus Rifle instead.
At the end of the day developer time and resources are limited and it is just unrealistic to expect that we can include absolutely every weapon/vehicle. Tough choices have to be made and we will never get anywhere if we are paralyzed by the worry we will be removing someone’s favorite weapon/vehicle. A well crafted sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse is ultimately better for everyone than one that might ultimately have more weapons and vehicles, but is filled to the brim with only superficial differences.
The funny thing about the BR/Carbine relationship is we can actively see how the sandbox could improve by removing one of them. The Carbine shines in ODST because it is the only true utility weapon in the game due to the BR’s removal. ODST in general is a masterclass in how subtle tweaking can make vast improvements to a near identical sandbox, but that is another thread.
> 2533274819446242;5:
> > 2535441330154481;4:
> > > 2533274819446242;2:
> > > There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
> > >
> > > Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
> > >
> > > Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
> > >
> > > We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
> >
> > I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
> > I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
>
> Its not as if we can’t fill out the sandbox without clones and its not as if weapons haven’t been cut and replaced before. We can still have say a Sniper Rifle and a Focus Rifle that satisfy the “lore” equivalencies of a long range marksman weapon for UNSC/Covenant respectively while still behaving very differently on a mechanical level. Losing a Beam Rifle that is little more than the sniper rifle, but purple, isn’t really a loss when we could use the Focus Rifle instead.
>
> At the end of the day developer time and resources are limited and it is just unrealistic to expect that we can include absolutely every weapon/vehicle. Tough choices have to be made and we will never get anywhere if we are paralyzed by the worry we will be removing someone’s favorite weapon/vehicle. A well crafted sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse is ultimately better for everyone than one that might ultimately have more weapons and vehicles, but is filled to the brim with only superficial differences.
>
> The funny thing about the BR/Carbine relationship is we can actively see how the sandbox could improve by removing one of them. The Carbine shines in ODST because it is the only true utility weapon in the game due to the BR’s removal. ODST in general is a masterclass in how subtle tweaking can make vast improvements to a near identical sandbox, but that is another thread.
I still stand to my point, I don’t like the lack of BR in ODST, neither I like the lack of Carbine in Reach, and that’s my opinion
> 2535441330154481;6:
> > 2533274819446242;5:
> > > 2535441330154481;4:
> > > > 2533274819446242;2:
> > > > There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
> > > >
> > > > Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
> > > >
> > > > Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
> > > >
> > > > We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
> > >
> > > I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
> > > I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
> >
> > Its not as if we can’t fill out the sandbox without clones and its not as if weapons haven’t been cut and replaced before. We can still have say a Sniper Rifle and a Focus Rifle that satisfy the “lore” equivalencies of a long range marksman weapon for UNSC/Covenant respectively while still behaving very differently on a mechanical level. Losing a Beam Rifle that is little more than the sniper rifle, but purple, isn’t really a loss when we could use the Focus Rifle instead.
> >
> > At the end of the day developer time and resources are limited and it is just unrealistic to expect that we can include absolutely every weapon/vehicle. Tough choices have to be made and we will never get anywhere if we are paralyzed by the worry we will be removing someone’s favorite weapon/vehicle. A well crafted sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse is ultimately better for everyone than one that might ultimately have more weapons and vehicles, but is filled to the brim with only superficial differences.
> >
> > The funny thing about the BR/Carbine relationship is we can actively see how the sandbox could improve by removing one of them. The Carbine shines in ODST because it is the only true utility weapon in the game due to the BR’s removal. ODST in general is a masterclass in how subtle tweaking can make vast improvements to a near identical sandbox, but that is another thread.
>
> I still stand to my point, I don’t like the lack of BR in ODST, neither I like the lack of Carbine in Reach, and that’s my opinion
Its not really about the Carbine or BR specifically, its about the understanding the reality that it just isn’t realistic to expect we can include every single weapon in the franchise. Even if each weapon had a truly unique niche, there just isn’t enough development time or resources to build, test, and balance them all, especially when you factor in the need for new weapons as well.
Cuts have to be made at some point and that means somebody is going to lose their favorite weapon no matter what. As a result we should be smart about which weapons and vehicles we select. Some just have more potential then others at the moment. Again, its not like we really need to make any drastic cuts, there plenty of room for a large sandbox that is both superficially and mechanically diverse. There just isn’t unlimited room in the sandbox.
> 2533274819446242;7:
> > 2535441330154481;6:
> > > 2533274819446242;5:
> > > > 2535441330154481;4:
> > > > > 2533274819446242;2:
> > > > > There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
> > > > >
> > > > > Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
> > > > >
> > > > > Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
> > > > >
> > > > > We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
> > > >
> > > > I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
> > > > I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
> > >
> > > Its not as if we can’t fill out the sandbox without clones and its not as if weapons haven’t been cut and replaced before. We can still have say a Sniper Rifle and a Focus Rifle that satisfy the “lore” equivalencies of a long range marksman weapon for UNSC/Covenant respectively while still behaving very differently on a mechanical level. Losing a Beam Rifle that is little more than the sniper rifle, but purple, isn’t really a loss when we could use the Focus Rifle instead.
> > >
> > > At the end of the day developer time and resources are limited and it is just unrealistic to expect that we can include absolutely every weapon/vehicle. Tough choices have to be made and we will never get anywhere if we are paralyzed by the worry we will be removing someone’s favorite weapon/vehicle. A well crafted sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse is ultimately better for everyone than one that might ultimately have more weapons and vehicles, but is filled to the brim with only superficial differences.
> > >
> > > The funny thing about the BR/Carbine relationship is we can actively see how the sandbox could improve by removing one of them. The Carbine shines in ODST because it is the only true utility weapon in the game due to the BR’s removal. ODST in general is a masterclass in how subtle tweaking can make vast improvements to a near identical sandbox, but that is another thread.
> >
> > I still stand to my point, I don’t like the lack of BR in ODST, neither I like the lack of Carbine in Reach, and that’s my opinion
>
> Its not really about the Carbine or BR specifically, its about the understanding the reality that it just isn’t realistic to expect we can include every single weapon in the franchise. Even if each weapon had a truly unique niche, there just isn’t enough development time or resources to build, test, and balance them all, especially when you factor in the need for new weapons as well.
>
> Cuts have to be made at some point and that means somebody is going to lose their favorite weapon no matter what. As a result we should be smart about which weapons and vehicles we select. Some just have more potential then others at the moment. Again, its not like we really need to make any drastic cuts, there plenty of room for a large sandbox that is both superficially and mechanically diverse. There just isn’t unlimited room in the sandbox.
In 2004 I would agree, the cutting room floor is a necessity as it was mentioned in this video Accurate E3 demos which is exactly what I think about on the 2 trailers about Halo Infinite. But now we are in a time where games are expected to put out continuous content after their release. Unfortunately that has turned out to just make a minimal viable product (the ones that was used more as a pitch demo then a mass produced one) and then throw it out in the masses and send the completed parts later.
So first I want a functional game, what I determine as functional is the features in Halo 3 as they have already been established in the franchise (campaign, multiplayer, theater, forge). Asking for all the features that was in halo reach (firefight) might be a little too much but they could be something that is added in later. If all we get is a short campaign and a competitive multiplayer mode and a casual for microtransactions mode (halo 5) with other stuff to be added in later (forge theater) then there is no way you could convince me that 343i has managed their development resources well.
> 2666640315087182;8:
> > 2533274819446242;7:
> > > 2535441330154481;6:
> > > > 2533274819446242;5:
> > > > > 2535441330154481;4:
> > > > > > 2533274819446242;2:
> > > > > > There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
> > > > > I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
> > > >
> > > > Its not as if we can’t fill out the sandbox without clones and its not as if weapons haven’t been cut and replaced before. We can still have say a Sniper Rifle and a Focus Rifle that satisfy the “lore” equivalencies of a long range marksman weapon for UNSC/Covenant respectively while still behaving very differently on a mechanical level. Losing a Beam Rifle that is little more than the sniper rifle, but purple, isn’t really a loss when we could use the Focus Rifle instead.
> > > >
> > > > At the end of the day developer time and resources are limited and it is just unrealistic to expect that we can include absolutely every weapon/vehicle. Tough choices have to be made and we will never get anywhere if we are paralyzed by the worry we will be removing someone’s favorite weapon/vehicle. A well crafted sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse is ultimately better for everyone than one that might ultimately have more weapons and vehicles, but is filled to the brim with only superficial differences.
> > > >
> > > > The funny thing about the BR/Carbine relationship is we can actively see how the sandbox could improve by removing one of them. The Carbine shines in ODST because it is the only true utility weapon in the game due to the BR’s removal. ODST in general is a masterclass in how subtle tweaking can make vast improvements to a near identical sandbox, but that is another thread.
> > >
> > > I still stand to my point, I don’t like the lack of BR in ODST, neither I like the lack of Carbine in Reach, and that’s my opinion
> >
> > Its not really about the Carbine or BR specifically, its about the understanding the reality that it just isn’t realistic to expect we can include every single weapon in the franchise. Even if each weapon had a truly unique niche, there just isn’t enough development time or resources to build, test, and balance them all, especially when you factor in the need for new weapons as well.
> >
> > Cuts have to be made at some point and that means somebody is going to lose their favorite weapon no matter what. As a result we should be smart about which weapons and vehicles we select. Some just have more potential then others at the moment. Again, its not like we really need to make any drastic cuts, there plenty of room for a large sandbox that is both superficially and mechanically diverse. There just isn’t unlimited room in the sandbox.
>
> In 2004 I would agree, the cutting room floor is a necessity as it was mentioned in this video Accurate E3 demos which is exactly what I think about on the 2 trailers about Halo Infinite. But now we are in a time where games are expected to put out continuous content after their release. Unfortunately that has turned out to just make a minimal viable product (the ones that was used more as a pitch demo then a mass produced one) and then throw it out in the masses and send the completed parts later.
>
> So first I want a functional game, what I determine as functional is the features in Halo 3 as they have already been established in the franchise (campaign, multiplayer, theater, forge). Asking for all the features that was in halo reach (firefight) might be a little too much but they could be something that is added in later. If all we get is a short campaign and a competitive multiplayer mode and a casual for microtransactions mode (halo 5) with other stuff to be added in later (forge theater) then there is no way you could convince me that 343i has managed their development resources well.
Cuts, even if they are patched in later are still cuts. Moreover we should be holding pubs/devs to a higher standard in the first place. The entire reason people “expect” continuous content is because more and more content keeps getting torn out of games to sell/drip feed later. Still doesn’t change the fact that there is a certain level of content that is realistically going to make it into the game at launch and that core sandbox is what is most important. Its not as if we are seeing the Goblin or Grenade launcher retroactively thrown into Halo 5’s campaign.
Having a strong core needs to come first and if it can be “patched in” later then the lazily designed clone weapons and vehicles can just as easily wait their turn and let the core game have some more depth.
I couldn’t care less about their excuses regarding basic content. If they can’t deliver the same basic features as Halo Reach at launch they shouldn’t be developing Halo. My whole point is that 343 needs to make better use of their resources, part of using better resources includes making smart choices regarding the launch sandbox. I don’t really see what your second point is supposed to be. 343 has historically done poorly with developing a fully featured Halo game, they should do better(and Bungie shares the blame as well regarding lazy weapon designs). Players should also want more from the sandbox than 1:1 faction reskins. They also need to understand that at the same time it is unrealistic to have every single possible item they want. Cuts have to be made and it shouldn’t be coming at the cost of interesting design and expected features sets.
> 2533274819446242;9:
> > 2666640315087182;8:
> > > 2533274819446242;7:
> > > > 2535441330154481;6:
> > > > > 2533274819446242;5:
> > > > > > 2535441330154481;4:
> > > > > > > 2533274819446242;2:
> > > > > > > There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
> > > > > > I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Its not as if we can’t fill out the sandbox without clones and its not as if weapons haven’t been cut and replaced before. We can still have say a Sniper Rifle and a Focus Rifle that satisfy the “lore” equivalencies of a long range marksman weapon for UNSC/Covenant respectively while still behaving very differently on a mechanical level. Losing a Beam Rifle that is little more than the sniper rifle, but purple, isn’t really a loss when we could use the Focus Rifle instead.
> > > > >
> > > > > At the end of the day developer time and resources are limited and it is just unrealistic to expect that we can include absolutely every weapon/vehicle. Tough choices have to be made and we will never get anywhere if we are paralyzed by the worry we will be removing someone’s favorite weapon/vehicle. A well crafted sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse is ultimately better for everyone than one that might ultimately have more weapons and vehicles, but is filled to the brim with only superficial differences.
> > > > >
> > > > > The funny thing about the BR/Carbine relationship is we can actively see how the sandbox could improve by removing one of them. The Carbine shines in ODST because it is the only true utility weapon in the game due to the BR’s removal. ODST in general is a masterclass in how subtle tweaking can make vast improvements to a near identical sandbox, but that is another thread.
> > > >
> > > > I still stand to my point, I don’t like the lack of BR in ODST, neither I like the lack of Carbine in Reach, and that’s my opinion
> > >
> > > …
> >
> > In 2004 I would agree, the cutting room floor is a necessity as it was mentioned in this video Accurate E3 demos which is exactly what I think about on the 2 trailers about Halo Infinite. But now we are in a time where games are expected to put out continuous content after their release. Unfortunately that has turned out to just make a minimal viable product (the ones that was used more as a pitch demo then a mass produced one) and then throw it out in the masses and send the completed parts later.
> >
> > So first I want a functional game, what I determine as functional is the features in Halo 3 as they have already been established in the franchise (campaign, multiplayer, theater, forge). Asking for all the features that was in halo reach (firefight) might be a little too much but they could be something that is added in later. If all we get is a short campaign and a competitive multiplayer mode and a casual for microtransactions mode (halo 5) with other stuff to be added in later (forge theater) then there is no way you could convince me that 343i has managed their development resources well.
>
> Cuts, even if they are patched in later are still cuts. Moreover we should be holding pubs/devs to a higher standard in the first place. The entire reason people “expect” continuous content is because more and more content keeps getting torn out of games to sell/drip feed later. Still doesn’t change the fact that there is a certain level of content that is realistically going to make it into the game at launch and that core sandbox is what is most important. Its not as if we are seeing the Goblin or Grenade launcher retroactively thrown into Halo 5’s campaign.
>
> Having a strong core needs to come first and if it can be “patched in” later then the lazily designed clone weapons and vehicles can just as easily wait their turn and let the core game have some more depth.
>
> I couldn’t care less about their excuses regarding basic content. If they can’t deliver the same basic features as Halo Reach at launch they shouldn’t be developing Halo. My whole point is that 343 needs to make better use of their resources, part of using better resources includes making smart choices regarding the launch sandbox. I don’t really see what your second point is supposed to be. 343 has historically done poorly with developing a fully featured Halo game, they should do better(and Bungie shares the blame as well regarding lazy weapon designs). Players should also want more from the sandbox than 1:1 faction reskins. They also need to understand that at the same time it is unrealistic to have every single possible item they want. Cuts have to be made and it shouldn’t be coming at the cost of interesting design and expected features sets.
Oh believe me I am demanding a pretty high standard. It is a shame that over the past decade the standard has dropped so low now that Halo 3 is considered a high standard and Halo Reach is even higher. Bungie went all out with Halo Reach even if you love it or hate it, it was still a good product. H2 had a lot of cuts but back then they were pioneering online console play and set the standard there. That is no longer a problem so saying what H2 had as the minimum standard is what I consider beneath a studio that has full backing of Microsoft. However I am pretty sure that we can all agree that the standard set for Halo 5 is way below that of Halo 3, so if we don’t get theater and forge along with single player and multiplayer then 343i would once again make a product that has fallen short of the standard and further tarnish the brand.
> 2533274819446242;7:
> > 2535441330154481;6:
> > > 2533274819446242;5:
> > > > 2535441330154481;4:
> > > > > 2533274819446242;2:
> > > > > There has been a problem with clone weapons since Halo 2, but 343 has exacerbated the problem with the Promethean sandbox and generally just taking a kitchen sink approach to the weapon sandbox without really doing anything to change up existing weapons. There are 5 utility precision weapons in Halo 5 that are all tripping over each other in the same niche and that is not even including Warzone variants.
> > > > >
> > > > > Long story short as it is right now there are too many weapons and not enough unique gameplay niches to go around, but again to be fair Halo 2 did start the trend of scrubbing the unique mechanics out of the weapon sandbox. RIP CE Plasma Rifle, the only blue plasma weapon in the series to not be little more than a blue/red SMG.
> > > > >
> > > > > Long story short much of the sandbox need to be either redesigned, replaced, or cut entirely(at least from launch) in order to make a weapon and vehicle sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse.
> > > > >
> > > > > We don’t have to settle for boring reskins of weapons or vehicles and there doesn’t need to be a 1:1 equivalent for every weapon type across all factions.
> > > >
> > > > I don’t really mind the 1:1 equivalent across factions, I started playing Halo on Halo 3 and I could never ever get rid of the BR neither i could of the Covenant Carbine ^_^"
> > > > I understand where you’re coming from though, I think they could try add some kind of variation between equivalents (not talking about weapons attachments of course, I didn’t ever want those in Halo, and I really hope they will never return! I just want a standard version for each weapon.)
> > >
> > > Its not as if we can’t fill out the sandbox without clones and its not as if weapons haven’t been cut and replaced before. We can still have say a Sniper Rifle and a Focus Rifle that satisfy the “lore” equivalencies of a long range marksman weapon for UNSC/Covenant respectively while still behaving very differently on a mechanical level. Losing a Beam Rifle that is little more than the sniper rifle, but purple, isn’t really a loss when we could use the Focus Rifle instead.
> > >
> > > At the end of the day developer time and resources are limited and it is just unrealistic to expect that we can include absolutely every weapon/vehicle. Tough choices have to be made and we will never get anywhere if we are paralyzed by the worry we will be removing someone’s favorite weapon/vehicle. A well crafted sandbox that is both fully fleshed out and mechanically diverse is ultimately better for everyone than one that might ultimately have more weapons and vehicles, but is filled to the brim with only superficial differences.
> > >
> > > The funny thing about the BR/Carbine relationship is we can actively see how the sandbox could improve by removing one of them. The Carbine shines in ODST because it is the only true utility weapon in the game due to the BR’s removal. ODST in general is a masterclass in how subtle tweaking can make vast improvements to a near identical sandbox, but that is another thread.
> >
> > I still stand to my point, I don’t like the lack of BR in ODST, neither I like the lack of Carbine in Reach, and that’s my opinion
>
> Its not really about the Carbine or BR specifically, its about the understanding the reality that it just isn’t realistic to expect we can include every single weapon in the franchise. Even if each weapon had a truly unique niche, there just isn’t enough development time or resources to build, test, and balance them all, especially when you factor in the need for new weapons as well.
>
> Cuts have to be made at some point and that means somebody is going to lose their favorite weapon no matter what. As a result we should be smart about which weapons and vehicles we select. Some just have more potential then others at the moment. Again, its not like we really need to make any drastic cuts, there plenty of room for a large sandbox that is both superficially and mechanically diverse. There just isn’t unlimited room in the sandbox.
BR and Carbine were examples XD
Also, doesn’t Halo 5 have dozens of weapons and vehicles through attachments and variants? (which I despise)
I think they could have a bigger weapon sandbox this time around, without them (attachments and variants), as they had more years and probably more budget!