" I’ve not played a single battle royale. Halo would be perfect for it. "
What even?
I’m pretty confident that this isn’t possible, even if it’s merely a wishful idea. From some of the info we have about BTB and knowing how the game functions, 24 players seems to be pushing it, there’s no way we’ll see quadruple that in a match.
I could see smaller scale elimination style gameplay that emulates a BR (or rather a BR emulates to begin with) on a slightly larger BTB map, maybe even a revamped take on H5 Warzone. However a full scale BR would likely be impossible from a technical perspective, especially seeing how differently Campaign performs compared to Multiplayer.
On top of that, the map would have to work around the sandbox, the sandbox shouldn’t be retooled to work around the map. Basic weapons work in their roles in current map structure, and power weapons like the Sniper would just be overpowered. Just look at maps like Launch Site and Behemoth, they’re great for objective gameplay but in Slayer modes they just drag on due to unforced engagement ranges. The only thing I could see working well would be the vehicle sandbox, and that’s only with mobility, not even combat.
1 Like
Laper Larden has a good video about this topic (was released pre Infinite launch as a hypothetical devils advocate), I recommend giving it a watch.
1 Like
It’s really odd that Call of Duty Mobile can have 100 players, Battlefield 3 and V can have 64 players, Minecraft can have 200+ players, yet Halo Infinite struggles with 24 players.
This isn’t true.
All built at its core or modded in ways that allow this.
Slipspace could probably be modified in time, but for now it’s most likely not going to allow this.
It is lol. I haven’t even played campaign yet and see how well a Sniper Rifle can utilized against open world combatants. Especially in Halo’s sandbox
-cough-
https://imgur.com/a/tyzK3E9
-cough cough-
I wish my fans knew me better 
I fail to see how this is relevant to my points in the post tho
1 Like
I’ve watched enough and looked into the genre enough to feel like I have an opinion about them on a gameplay level
However:
I’ve sworn off Call of Duty since Ghosts. I’m not going to support Activision. Especially with their current lawsuits.
I get pestered enough by others who play fortnite that I never want to play it.
Apex is EA. I’m more flexible with them, but similar boat to Activision.
PUBG is pretty much dead now.
I want to get into Battle Royale, but most companies are either too scummy for me to want to add to their playercount, or the game is dead.
1 Like
If it’s affecting Big Team Battle, I don’t see why it wouldn’t be changed.
You haven’t played campaign, and I doubt you’ve actually played a battle royale FPS either, from what you’re saying.
I’ve played several FPS games with battle royale modes, and snipers aren’t as big of a problem as you’re saying.
Not to mention that Sniper Rifles would likely be very limited in a Halo battle royale.
I’m not sure why you’d be more flexible with EA, when both are about as bad as each other.
I’d even say EA is worse, but only slightly.
Call of Duty Mobile and PlayerUnknown’s Battleground Mobile were okay when they had more players.
I didn’t suggest the player count was the reason for the BTB issues.
I’m not playing the gatekeeper game bud, go pawn that childish crap off on someone else.
Sniper rifles work very differently from game to game, and you can’t use Warzone’s/PUBG’s shooting/sniping mechanics as an example of why it’ll be fine in Halo Infinite when they function vastly different.
In a BR, it’ll be built around around Halo’s power dynamic sandbox. No falloff damage, no bullet drop, nothing to compensate for line of sight. You see a player, you aim at that player, you shoot and kill that player, whatever distance they’re at. Right now most weapons are tuned around mid range combat, just look at how BTB works with most standoffs for further proof, with snipers being incredibly difficult to take care of if you don’t have a weapon that can compete. In a large scale BR, the current sandbox would not work well.
They’re very limited in regular gameplay, and 8 bullets is enough to swing a match.
I’m not talking about the current issues.
You said, “From some of the info we have about BTB and knowing how the game functions, 24 players seems to be pushing it”.
Why would you think that it seems to be pushing it if it’s not causing some problem that shows that?
So you haven’t played any battle royale FPS games.
Well, gatekeeping or not, you can’t really say how it will work if you don’t know how those games work.
Why wouldn’t Halo have falloff damage or bullet drop?
Also, some weapons already have bullet drop, such as the Mangler and the Skewer.
Not only that, but sniper rifles work about the same in most of the battle royales that I’ve played.
From what I remember, most of them don’t even have sway when aiming.
Anything can be enough to swing a match.
Because of the overall instability of the engine and game as we can currently test it as well.
Defend The House even shows that between latency, desync, and player action, even less than 24 players currently seems to stress the game.
Adding more in its current state would probably not work well at all.
Because it doesn’t now. Creating a BR based around Halo Infinite would either have to take advantage of existing assets or create new instances of them from the ground to compensate for balance. The current sandbox would not play well with a full scale BR.
Look at Cold War vs Warzone. All the weapons in CW have two versions, one that works in CW and one that works in Warzone due to engine differences that weren’t supposed to happen in the first place. I’m not saying Halo would be as extreme as that case, but it wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense logistically to create a whole different sandbox for a gamemode for balance purposes if you can avoid it.
Yes some weapons do, not all weapons. They’re all balanced around the current map sizes and engagement ranges. Again, look at how most skirmishes materialize in BTB, usually around short to medium ranges.
Long range precision rewarding weapons, that’s how snipers work in every game.
However, they work in different ways to compensate for the potential power they present.
Warzone/PUBG/Apex all feature projectile speed and bullet drop at long distances to reward skill and practice and punish sedentary strategy, but prevent the engagements from turning into mile long laser fights.
The S7 on the other hand is a Hitscan weapon at any range. No leading, no range handicaps, just point and pop. This is what sets the S7 apart and also why it would wreck the BR mode in its current state.
Actually there is a comparison to Warzone I can make. When the SP-R was added in it had the ability to equip .338 Lapua rounds. This turned the rifle from a projectile weapon with projectile speed and bullet drop into a hitscan weapon with near unlimited range. It had such an impact to the gameplay that engagement distances expanded and it was a must use. It was quickly patched with an ADS and damage nerf. But this is what the S7 currently functions as.
“Defend The House”?
Also, as I said, they need to fix that anyway.
If they do, I doubt that the amount of players would be a problem.
There might be weapons with falloff damage, but I haven’t checked (on the Halo wiki however, the Shotgun in Halo 4 was said by 343 to have less falloff damage, so I wouldn’t doubt if there were weapons with that in Infinite).
Even if there isn’t, I don’t think it would be difficult to add or even necessary.
I haven’t played Cold War.
A battle royale mode likely wouldn’t require many balance changes if any.
There’s no reason they couldn’t add it to all weapons in another mode, but as I said about falloff damage, there isn’t any need for it anyway.
Also, most battles in battle royale modes are short to medium range.
When I played them, I didn’t notice any bullet drop, and even videos of Warzone don’t show it.
Also, a sedentary strategy likely wouldn’t work, since the maps frequently make you move with the changing playable zones, and there’s so much room on the map that the odds of finding a lot of players while waiting isn’t as likely as you think.
In addition, at the end of the match, it often puts you into an open area, so if you stay in a building outside of that area, either you’re going to die from being outside of the area, or you’re going to be found by a player trying to find whoever isn’t in that area or trying to do the same thing.
So was CoD? Does that mean Halo has to stick to it? I am not saying that Halo has to be BR only I am only saying I would have fun with a BR (and I asume others would have aswell) in Halo since I like Arena and BR both.
Thats exactly my point there could be s much cool stuff for a BR in Halo but as you said befor they should think about working on something like that the core game needs to be fixed.
I am pretty sure that the slipspace engine is able to handel more than the 24 players, the problem in BTB is for sure not the engine… (just my assumtion)
because:
Wondering about the sense of creating a new powerfull engine that can`t keep up with engines that are used on mobiles but I need to do some more research. (What I will def. do after my exams)
Gonna have a look at it later today.
Those who say the game needs other things
Maybe check out my other post: feedback and wishes after 100h+ into multiplayer
cheers guys!
1 Like
The only BR halo needs is the one that goes pew pew in 3 round bursts.
Halo is its best when it is and plays like HALO. Halo having identity crisis’ is what made games like 4/5 bad. There are PLENTY of battle royals to play. And if u like battle royals you can PLAY THEM. Halo is a classic style arena shooter and is for people who enjoy that game play. Stop trying to change a game that many fans like as is because you prefer a different genre and want all shooters to fit that mold. Splitting halos player base between 2 diff games essentially is not good for HALO its ONLY good for fans of battle royals. It also sounds pretty entitled, be like a bunch of classic halo/arena shooter fans flooding every battle royal game, Apex, fortnight, pubg, making post after post about asking them to add an arena slayer to their already established genre
It’s a different mode.
I don’t see you telling people to go play football, racing or zombie games because Grifball, Race and Infection aren’t arena shooter modes.
Apex and PUBG already have an arena slayer mode.
I think Fortnite has something similar to Big Team Battle as well.
Well, your point is moot anyway, because having a battle royale mode wouldn’t do anything to the arena mode in Halo.
People who want to play arena modes would still play arena modes, and people who like the battle royale mode likely wouldn’t always be playing it.
1 Like
And look how long its taking them to fix big team and also make fixes to the arena sandbox. Adding a Battle royal, maps and balancing things for that would only slow their ability to maintain and add too the arena gameplay. It will split the recourses. the game modes you mentioned do not impact halos overall gameplay and ability to update the way adding an entirely new genre mode would, multi team, or other past modes that fit perfectly within the sandbox would not hurt either. because they fit . so the point is not moot. 343 needs to focus on the core of halo. Not random experimental additions because of other popular genres.
The reason Infinite has been received well is because its return to classic feel. If they add in a battle royal and its not on par with the top battle royals out there and also delays arena updates, it could easily kill the game.
Yeah well, CoD doesn’t seem to do well for a lot of people these days with decisions they’re making. Sure, people stream Warzone like TimtheTatMan, Dr D, Lupo, etc. But do we really need a BR in Halo? What does it really bring to the table that is unique? Nothing that several other games haven’t already done and would feel old at this point.
What it brings to the table aside, you have to stop and consider the resources that would need to be diverted to making this BR. It’s claimed they can just ‘reuse’ the campaign, but it’s probably not as simple as ripping the world from the campaign and tossing it into matchmaking. A lot of things would need to be changed, AI spawns (whether they choose to keep them or not), campaign triggers would have to be deactivated, certain doors would have to be locked and the lower areas removed, cutscene triggers would have to be removed, weapon spawns would have to be selected, tested, etc.
That’s probably not something a small 10 man team can do, that’s gonna take time away from content that people actually want. And isn’t one of the most vocalized complaints a lack of content and replayability? I don’t think a BR is gonna give that the majority.
That’s just my take on it.
1 Like
So what you are saying is basically that Halo has to stay the way it was/is?
So what Halo is your core experiance? Mine would be Halo 3
Let me give you some answers to your points.
So if like you are saying ppl play Halo because it is Halo, an ARENA-Shooter, so those ppl will stick to the classic Halo-experience and will play the Arena Modes. So the Battle Royal Community will be new players that come from Warzone, Apex, Fortnite ansd so on… Then there would be the third group of ppl like me that like Arena and battle royal so this would be the only splited group. and now let me tell you something that benefits Halo and 343 because, there would be in general more player that maybe buy the Battlepass or Shop Items (direct incom for 343 to develop new maps, Skins or maybe stock up the budget for Halo 7.
Next benefit would be more exposal on twitch which is an huge advantage because if there are more viewers more new ppl will have a look and will maybe join the game that is f2p which means the community will grow in general.
The Game is not b2p nor will it have DLCs (It would be stupid to sell map packs or similar things for a f2p game)
Next Thing is with Warzone or Firefight, as far as I know ppl liked those modes and are requesting it back in Infinit so that is already another part of the Halo-community.
I did not want to tell you this but if you bring up that argument:¨
So if there would be Firefight or Warzone comming back or if there will be a Battle Royal its pretty simple: If you dont like these modes do not play them EASY
We never said 343 should stop fixing the game and start developing a BR. We ask / had an idea for something new to the franchise, to do when everything is right.
Balancing will reach a point where it will be perfect unless they add new weapons so that should not matter. Games like GuildWars are able to tweak skills and perks based on the mode you play PvE, PvP has different scalings so problem solved with impaact on the clasic experiance. Even if I think that this is not necessary, I would be totaly happy if you let me drop with 120 other spartans on the map and have a huge mayham.
They could also add it as a rotation mode that comes up every weekend like battlegrounds in MMORPGs if you are so worried about a splited community.
The industry is a fast one, games have to live up to the hype (which Infinit does partial). Otherewise a game will die. f2p is a chance but also a risk since for more and new content the playerbase must be big enough and tbh buy enough stuff from the store to found it. So more players is better for the game. And after that has been said adding a hyped game mode like BR to a finished and polishd Halo Infinit (which I think will take at least 6 months) will draw and keep a huge playerbase back to Halo.
It could bring some new mechanics to the table, like I mentioned in the original post. there are plenty of players like me that have a lot of ideas.
To be honest I would think making a new map would be easier and better since 343 is an Xbox studio MS could lend them a hand with the guys from Playground Games (the guys from Forza Horizon (The Map is insane)) I can imagine that the Xbox Game studios could help each other out.
Depends on the time you give them. I know what you mean I think it would take a team of 50. 343 has currently approximately 750 employees.
My core halo experience was halo 2.
So do you think 343 can snap fingers and POOF* a battle royal into existence? Because if they spent time to build a battle royal, test and balance it, give it live service updates and things required to keep it going and healthy to satisfy the battle royal player base. AND all that NOT effect the arena side of things, with balance patches, new maps, Or even mess with the CHALLENGE system, then you are crazy lol. The first time they drop a new battle royal map, while not having new arena content in a while because they worked on the battle royal content instead. will annoy ALOT of halo fans. And thats the stuff that WILL happen.
Many games have multiple modes, Like battlefield having rush and conquest ect. halo with btb slayer ect. But the modes all fit within a similar sandbox and balance. Games that go beyond multiple modes into multiple genres are still only known for their primary mode/genre. And that is where most recourses go and the other mode is usually a subpar experience.
i hear this crap a lot. twitch views is not the end all be all. Youtube vids still gets more views than twitch on average, and halo is doing fine on most halo related content.
ya, its pretty simple isint it. warzone is a COD battle royal, i dont play it. i dont go on forums ask them them to make it a classic team shooter. ITS A BATTLE ROYAL if i want to play a team shooter cod game ill play other cod games. simple.
you act like creating an entire new mode with maps and new balance is simple. while also maintaining and updating core halo. Maybe games studios should hire you. Sounds like you could get things done super fast easy peasy
again. Thats takes time and recourses away from core game. “ideas” take time to make reality. and id rather them use that time on halo not some halo battle royal experimental thing.
Shouldn’t you want them to fix things faster instead of saying there should be less things in the game?
Not really.
It’s not like they have to release a new battle royale map every month or even every year.
Halo isn’t just an arena shooter.
The mechanics are a big part of what differentiates it from other games, as well as its campaigns.
Infinite is supposed to last a decade.
Having a few months of focus on a battle royale mode and map isn’t going to kill the game.
What does Slayer bring to the table that’s unique?
Capture the Flag?
Strongholds?
The modes are different, but they’re not unique.
Many arena shooter games have them.
It’s not about what the modes bring that’s unique, it’s what the game brings to the modes.
Halo is unique enough to make the mode worthwhile.
I don’t think it would be difficult for them to remove campaign triggers, depending on how they made them, but a lot of things would need to be changed as you said, and it would probably be faster for them to make a new map.
Like what?
Aside from testing, the maps, weapons, vehicles, armors, etc. aren’t that difficult or time-consuming to create.
Not only that, but as I said in this post, Infinite is supposed to last a decade.
What’s the problem if they add a battle royale mode in a few years from now?
Battle royales are quite good for replayability.
Because they play differently, it gives a break between arena mode matches.
Most battle royales don’t get new maps that often.
Bologna.
The battle royales in Call of Duty are fine, and so are the arena modes.
1 Like