Short and simple. No arguments. What do you think it is? I keep seeing people say the game “isn’t Halo anymore”. Why do you or do not think Halo is Halo now?
I think it’s a primarily hipfire shooter where you shoot shielded opponents. There are power weapons and powerups. You fight to control them, as well as control key points of the map. I feel that the gameplay is still Halo.
The true definition of Halo gameplay is “Two players enter, one better player leaves. The other is respawning.”
Halo, to me, has always been an Arena shooter in the same way that Quake and Unreal Tournament were. And this is what Halo 5 is. No Spartan abilities, sprint, or “the pistol is OP and should be a sidearm like other games” will change this classification.
Halo has been about starting off on equal footing, gaining control of power weapons, winning, and, most of all, outplaying your opponent on a given day. And having played a lot, there’s nothing in Halo 5 that deviates from this premise.
Of course, you’ll see that people in this forum will misread concepts like Spartan abilities and sprint as “moving away from the Halo formula” but the fact that every player starts out with this negates that. They’re more far-reaching and present than, say, Equipment in Halo 3, but that doesn’t necessarily make them bad.
There will always be people who will accept classic Halo and nothing else, though.
-Regenerative health (shields)
-Vehicular combat
-No accuracy penalties such as CoF or bloom while moving (many modern games make you stand still and/or use sights to be accurate)…hipfiring is viable here
-A bit longer TTK than most shooters, overall pace a bit slower (but relatively still fast)
-Melee attacks
-Certain exotic weapons like the energy sword
-Weapons that are made for a specific role instead of being omnipotent (e.g. an assault rifle in Call of Duty has more range than the DMR in Halo and kills faster than said DMR)
-Powerups and powerweps
-Reloading while having a few bullets left in the clip won’t discard the remaining bullets from that clip (some “realistic” games discard them)
-Limited carrying capacity for guns (2)
-Motion tracker radar
I might add more later as I remember them.
those people/threads annoy me too
h5 far from perfect but also far from a fail
biggest problem still is the stuff we were used to thats missing
but as long as they complain they probably haven’t even quit playing #) h5 won’t die as soon as they say
communication from 343’s side is just bad
and there are other games and RL if it really happens so yeah#)
Beautiful environments even on limited console capabilities. To me it’s always been a game just based on nostalgia. The changes doesn’t really bother me personally, as long as I have a good time and play as a big green dude with a cool voice.
I do understand why people want the formula to stay the same, but as long as I get to shoot purple aliens on spaceships, it will be a halo game to me.
To me it’s a fast paced fps that anyone can pick up but only a few can truly master.
Halo is a skill game it’s all about team work and control, be it power weapons, power ups, or key terrain. If you want to win you need to communicate and dominate. Like I said, anyone can pick it up and run around, but what really separates halo is how much the overall experience changes once you learn how to master it.
To me Halo’s essence is best defined as all the common elements of the first three games. Not by entirely vapid one-liners like “two men enter, one man leaves”, which are applicable to almost any game in existence.
Maps that are inspired in their complex design by arena classics, which have discernible paths and thoughtful flow, and usually a significant amount of elevation and play between levels. Not like a game such as Titanfall, where flow is unrestricted and thus “map control” becomes largely meaningless. Not like a military shooter, where the maps are just flat planes with random rooms scattered about.
Movement works in tandem with combat. You can strafe and shoot accurately. You can jump onto objects in the middle of a fight to juke opponents. You can shoot accurately while falling. I can already think of several mechanics in recent Halo games that challenge or break these fundamentals.
Depth comes from simplicity in design. There’s a small handful of mechanics with a wide range of applications, as opposed to having a large number of gimmicky mechanics that only do one or two things at most. This is partly why I can see the validity in Thruster, but despise mechanics like Spartan Charge.
Players spawn with a powerful utility weapon, with more niche weapons on the map (as opposed to the traditional arena shooter where the spawn weapon is a piece of crap, or the modern millitary shooter where all weapons are practically the same). Combat is based around strafing and has potential for players to come back from a disadvantage (or at least it was, until they ramped up aim assist values and nerfed strafe effectiveness).
I still don’t deem this as a satisfactory answer, as there’s a lot more to what defines Halo’s essence. It’s easier to explain what breaks Halo’s essence than to describe every single last thing about Halo itself.
Well when i go back and play past halo games, especially the campaign, i feel emotion. Wonder and mysteriousness fill your senses youre absorbed in the environment in a specific level. This is present in halo ce, 2, and 3. i. e, the second level in halo ce was so memorable because it was an open area, and the environment brought the feelings of discovery and mystery. The sense of wonder in the original halo trilogy was dropped in halo 4 and 5. Also, the sense of being “the master chuef” is not present. In the newer halo games, you dont feel like the hero of the story, a legendary super soldier. Thus very feeling was destroyed with the addition of locke. The reason y people come back to the campaign is to get blown away, which is what bungie did with the master chief and plot.
-A consistent base movement speed allong with not having weird mechanics that increase your velocity at a simple press of a button so you can have good CQB map design that has verticality. Bigger maps would have more exciting things like giant man cannons and awesome vehicles. Heck, let’s be creative and try to do something with a gondola, see how that turns out.
-Balanced weapons with each filling its own niche.
-Surprising situations with each encounter.
-The sandbox be as it should be, move around and shoot people, keep your gun up at any time because you have to be ready to engage at any given time because in Halo, you can actually fight back even if you’re getting shot at first. So your reaction is essential. Which means if your gun is down you’re more likely to get #rekt, which means crap I have to get the hell away and thus you won’t engage in that encounter in the first place. In COD for example it doesn’t matter. 99% of the time you do not have the chance to fight back so it doesn’t matter if your gun is lowered when you’re getting shot at since you can’t fight back anyway.
-Simple to get in to, hard to master. The control scheme in the older Halo games were perfect for anyone to learn. But there can still be a clear skill gap between two players. The beauty of Halo is its simplicity, more complex does not mean more depth. To give an example, say we add spartan abilities to Halo 2. Let’s play Lockdown or Lockout or whatever you want to call it. You should be able to climb from the lower floor up to the top floor by just jumping above. What happens then? The grav lift and many paths will be rendered useless because people wouldn’t have to make a detour to go where they want to. This might seem good at first, but it makes the map less exciting and thus boring. These things like grav lifts are what made Halo’s map design so unique and caused what I’ve stated before, surprising situations. That’s the issue I have with Halo 5’s maps atm. Low replayablity compared with the maps of the older Halo games.
I guess we’re talking about aesthetics too.
Music is a blend of genres, typically Orchestral and Rock.
Forerunners are an ancient and mysterious civilization leaving long-lasting,elegant looking monoliths behind. Not a society of shiny robots that look like they were the product of a skeleton-insect frat party taking place in the Tron universe, who were employed to design magical floating buildings that look like something out of every sci-fi ever. Buildings used to evoke the feeling of being in a dimly lit cathedral or great library. Now it’s like entering a rave.
The UNSC was designed to feel relatively modern and familiar as a stark contrast to the other species. Olive-Drab Uniforms, Jeeps, Pump Shotguns…343I completely missed the point and thus not even the humans were spared from the generic sci-fi brush.
Relevant to the above point, as a general rule the art style was minimalistic. Now everything is overly detailed so that even the details have details. Just compare the old shotgun to the new one, the old sniper to the new one, or any ship to any old ship. Or the ridiculous amount of visual clutter on the maps themselves.
He asked about gameplay. The way your spartan looks is not what makes the gameplay, it adds to the experience. The gameplay mechanics themselves should not be affected by aesthetics.
> 2535465785483482;9:
> Well when i go back and play past halo games, especially the campaign, i feel emotion. Wonder and mysteriousness fill your senses youre absorbed in the environment in a specific level. This is present in halo ce, 2, and 3. i. e, the second level in halo ce was so memorable because it was an open area, and the environment brought the feelings of discovery and mystery. The sense of wonder in the original halo trilogy was dropped in halo 4 and 5. Also, the sense of being “the master chuef” is not present. In the newer halo games, you dont feel like the hero of the story, a legendary super soldier. Thus very feeling was destroyed with the addition of locke. The reason y people come back to the campaign is to get blown away, which is what bungie did with the master chief and plot.
You do know the story is taken directly from the books right? The execution of the story in campaign is debatable, but I hear 4 and 5 are using more of the lore than Bungie did
> 2533274793108235;13:
> > 2535465785483482;9:
> > Well when i go back and play past halo games, especially the campaign, i feel emotion. Wonder and mysteriousness fill your senses youre absorbed in the environment in a specific level. This is present in halo ce, 2, and 3. i. e, the second level in halo ce was so memorable because it was an open area, and the environment brought the feelings of discovery and mystery. The sense of wonder in the original halo trilogy was dropped in halo 4 and 5. Also, the sense of being “the master chuef” is not present. In the newer halo games, you dont feel like the hero of the story, a legendary super soldier. Thus very feeling was destroyed with the addition of locke. The reason y people come back to the campaign is to get blown away, which is what bungie did with the master chief and plot.
>
>
> You do know the story is taken directly from the books right? The execution of the story in campaign is debatable, but I hear 4 and 5 are using more of the lore than Bungie did
Bungie hardly, if ever, utilized the lore unless it fit their narrative. There was a huge backlash from the story community over The Fall of Reach and Halo: Reach because certain plot elements completely raped the canon.
Storywise, the best thing that 343 has going for them over Bungie is that they are mindful, and work around the lore.
WHAT IS THE ESSENCE OF HALO GAMEPLAY? Muliplayer gameplay wise.
“FUN”
Gameplay only?
It would have made Thruster pack a much more crucial ability… Now even in Halo 5 where the grenades are mini nukes, it still doesn’t matter because you are a small target to begin with, on top of the fact that you can thrust out of the way. When you spawned in the map in Halo 1 - 3, you could feel that you were a massive walking tank and that any character from any other game would look tiny standing next to you, which, while it was immersive, kept the long killtimes in check as it also increased player visibility.
But the main draw was that despite Halo’s average killtimes, as long as you killed everyone directly in front of you, you never had to worry about anyone coming up behind you. This was easily the most rewarding part of Halo compared to other fast-paced shooters and it honestly didn’t make sense at the time how they balanced it so well. But I can tell you right now, it’s because the people behind weren’t going faster than you…
Halo 5 is roughly on par with Halo 2 in terms of killtimes, but obviously if you shoot everyone in front of you people come sprinting up behind you pretty quickly and this isn’t very fun. It really doesn’t reward keeping your weapon ready in a consistent matter, and that is a big detriment as far as Halo gameplay goes.
But while it excels in this area it also fails miserably at balancing map maneuverability with player vulnerability. Why is it considered a good idea to tie the two together? Realistically fights last long enough in Halo for players to come up behind you anyway, so why do they all need to disable your weapon when used? Even Black Ops 3 lets you shoot during Clamber…
This is Halo, and not every respawn is going to be safe. The most viable method of defense is obviously to shoot everyone back, yet in order for you to get back into the action you must be Sprinting, Thrusting, and Clambering forward in order to prevent traffic from building up behind you, as everyone else has the mechanics. This is where sticking to not using Spartan Abilities (or even fighting at all) is a disadvantage. In the same way that walking across an open intersection is a disadvantage.
Except using them to get into battle faster disadvantages you as well because your weapon is disabled the majority of the time.
See, there is an imbalance here. You’re not rewarding the player. It’s okay for you to implement all these mechanics into the game that make players go faster, but making them all have the same ‘tradeoff’ of increased vulnerability should reward not using them, and it doesn’t. You aren’t rewarded for walking in traffic no matter how beastly you are. It doesn’t reward anything except randomness and traveling really quickly in groups, which devalues individual skill quite a lot.
If it’s really conducive to gameplay like Halo’s gameplay, the player would move forward regardless and be empowered when doing so. Offensive play and defensive play are situational this way, and aren’t rewarded randomly, making only one option truly viable in a given situation. It makes no sense to add Spartan Abilities to empower the player, only to often de-incentivize using them OR your weapon.
With one word I would say :"Knowledge "
> 2533274793108235;1:
> Short and simple. No arguments. What do you think it is? I keep seeing people say the game “isn’t Halo anymore”. Why do you or do not think Halo is Halo now?
>
> I think it’s a primarily hipfire shooter where you shoot shielded opponents. There are power weapons and powerups. You fight to control them, as well as control key points of the map. I feel that the gameplay is still Halo.
This IS the essence of halo that is most important to me.
also everyone starts with the exact same weapons and abilities and precision weapon skill is rewarded over all else.
when people say halo 5 doesn’t feel like halo, but reach does, I cringe.
> 2533274921373075;18:
> With one word I would say :"Knowledge "
>
> - learn the spawns
> - timing weapons
> - getting a solid 4-shot
> - running a flag
> - Holding power-positions
> - playing a mind-game with the enemy
> - domino-effect ( i push to early- I die - enemy gets rocket- team dies- Flag Stolen-…)
> So everything Halo5 doesnt offer.
Huh? Have you not played halo 5
