VivaLebowski

You guys gave me an interesting idea with regards to rank and peoples long term record. Obviously, the difficulty in judging betrayals lies in individual games...its complicated for the game to have to distinguish between an actual intentional betrayal and an accident out of game. Lots of people have a bad game where they rage kill a teammate accidentally kills a teammate. But even noobs who suck are not going to rack up huge amounts of betrayals in a month or two...perhaps the system should credit ban or completely ban people from matchmaking based on the aggregate of their betrayals in any given time period, say a week for conveniences sake. You cant stop someone from being a **** once, but with a feature like this, you can force people to change their long term behavior. That and, something which acts on the player out-of-game based on their stats would likely be much easier to implement since you don't have to write up complicated features. With the modern stat tracking and banning this would prob be easy as long as the system was automated. And keep the current system for in game to prevent really egregious cases. In a nut-shell, the system that does got implemented should be out of game aimed at habitual betrayers, and we can just keep the current in game boot system.

I'd prefer a hybrid of the two...swap out "exp" for credits earned and use credit as the resource to gain lower ranks and additional high ranks BUT keep the skill counter in. I didn't even try to shoot for 50, I'll admit that, but having a high rank seems useless in Reach. It doesnt show you are good, it shows you have no life. Plus, there were a bewildering variety of ranks, and that definitely did not need to be. Being a 5 star general in Halo 3 is status. Being an eclipse in Reach is chicken-****. And this is coming from someone who never reached the coveted 50.

Ah well that sounds more like a playlist issue though...they should just have slayer in big team battle and objective in big team skirmish. Then again, I'm one of the people who always votes for slayer lol.

Hmm I agree all around, as long as Grenades and explosives are excepted. The majority of the time, people are shooting at others with small arms like the AR so making that damage rebound would be okay.

Yeah I definitely do not think Bungie did it intentionally. I mean, yes of course the implementation of the feature was unintentional, but the fact that they didn't foresee these unintended consequences wasn't intentional. But I agree, Customization is just a dangerous game, especially in something like Halo which relies on a certain amount of symmetry from player to player. But this gives me hope because the way I see it, a customization which starts from scratch, such as out of game armor "perks" (for lack of a better word) have a much better chance of being successful. That and, having the cosmetic customization of Reach + a bit of actual gameplay customization is just a ton of customization, as much if not more than Halo's competition. And I'm looking forward to that.

The previous systems have always seemed way to weak and unsubstantial. Id prefer something which has big bright thermal contrasts, like in the original Ghost Recon. It'd be interesting to see a full nighttime multiplayer map, pitch black, and then big ass blooms from Plasma and other ordnance streaking through. Might be a big too BF/COD-ish for some though.

There's really been no info on what form this "armor customization" is going to take other than that it wont resemble CoD's perks but was similiar enough to earn that nickname for a little while. So who can say?

If you throw a grenade which kills a teammate who idiotically wanders in front of you, you should die too? There's plenty of games of team doubles me and my bros would have lost as a result of that. Yeah ********* are annoying but if you find yourself having problems with people as much as your posting about this suggests, your doing something wrong. The current system cant solve all the problems but it is good enough. You won't be able to get rid of all jackasses so best not to do anything extraordinary to combat them.

Agree with this, as well as Dino and other supporting a choice. 3rd person and 1st person both have their fans and their better off in certain situations. There should be a choice, not mandatory either way. Having the motion tracker would help. Also, as previously noted, your taking a risk with an assassination no matter what, so whats the big deal?

Are you mad, my brother? --- What a delightful story. --- Seriously though this is the same damn cherry picking you posted in your other post. Stop posting multiple posts if you cant post any interesting posts. Your posts are redundant! I am never redundant in my posts when I post my posts. So I would know wouldn't I?

Oh, and Perfer sounds like you are trying to start a mispelling Meme. I perfer this, I perfer that. Rather funny.

My personal favs are always little Forerunner Arena's (Guardian) or big ass spaces (The various iterations of Gulch). But people love all sorts of stuff so it should be a mix of Human and Forerunner maps...I don't think anyone is desperate for Covenant style maps, at least, I'm not. Would love to see the return of classics from Halo 3. It seems to me that Halo 1 and 2 have been thoroughly canvassed for remakes though including a new version of Gulch is mandatory. Nice to see a return of Valhalla too, even though they are supposed to be similiar.

I do see the value of having a random Veto and thus making sure there is allot of variety BUT I would still marginally have to favor Voting. I think that's one of things Reach got right that 343 needs to keep. PS. Its Ironic that you didn't make a poll for this haha.

All this just proves my point. We should judge a feature by its own merits and by how effectively it is implemented. Not just because it is new. Progress can be very bad and very good, so best to judge individually. But I will concede this, Constant, with Sprint in particular I do not care that much either way. That said, the scale of Halo maps does make it helpfull in terms of mobility and Halo maps are getting bigger. Hemorrhage dwarfed Blood Gulch. In the future, not necessarily this Halo but say the Halo's on the next gen,I'm anticipating larger maps and larger teams. Having a high degree of mobility for everyone on foot might well necessitate Sprint as we see certain maps get larger and larger. goes without saying that 343 needs to keep at least half the maps the small arena style that we all know and love too though.

While arguing in another thread it occurred to me what went wrong with the introduction of Armor Abilities. AA's were envisioned as the follow up to previous Halo's equipment and Power Ups. But those things had been "power ups". They conferred an advantage on purpose. Where Reach went wrong was trying to apply things which were meant to make you more powerful in such a way as to make everyone equally powerfull. In Halo 3 the Bubble Shield is not meant to match Active Camo. It is not supposed to be a level playing field. In Reach, Bungie tried to modify all these preexisting things than throw in some new ones without making an effort to make the different AA's balance each other Rock,Paper,Scissors style. So the core problem is trying to adapt things which are inherently asymmetrical in gameplay terms to be symmetrical, and the result of this contradictory approach is you get AA's which are either lame knockoffs of previous versions (Active Camo) or Overpowered (Armor Lock). And this says another thing about the future of Halo...if 343 makes an armor customization system which changes peoples abilities but is not necessarily the Armor abilities of Reach, it doesnt have to have the same problems because rather than trying to adapt things which are inherently unbalanced to be balanced, 343 will likely be starting off from a point of "what little changes can we give people to customize themselves while remaining balanced?".

3rd person might be better for your survival, but your sacrificing that already when you even bother with the assassination in the first place. 1st person is more immersive and more fun and that is what should count, not the survivability of the person doing the action. Halo was made first person for a reason. The exact same argument you make for assassinations and/or vehicles could be applied to Halo in general, and while it might not necessarily have been disastrous for Halo from the beginning if it had been 3rd person, it would not be the game we know and love.

I have no objection to all these things being included one way or another, just as long as its not "loadouts" at the beginning of the game.

@Constantly The problem with your argument here is that Sprint is universal. I run, you chase. Its as simple as that. And don't appeal to me about trying to get that "last shot" off as they run around the corner...I was the guy running around the corner. And as a result of that tiny amount of lag between when they pull the trigger on their TV and when I move around the corner on mine, I will die even though I am already around the corner. Its one of my pet peeves. People's Sprint rate should be decreased dramatically whenever they are hit by anything, as in Gears of War, and that alone would help solve some of your problems.

Reach's problem was that it tried to find a comfortable spot between COD's classes and Halo's symmetrical gameplay. The result was a failed feature which was too tepid to really feel significant but at the same time just annoying enough to piss allot of people off...for example, one AA is not made to counter another AA. There was no concept of balancing AA's against each other because the damn things were envisioned as the successor to Halo 3's equipment and power ups, things which you didn't have from the beginning. In effect, Reach tacked tried to apply asymettrical powers in such a way so as to be symmetrical, failing to realize that you simply can't have both. So both the AA's which were being represented were flawed. Active Camo, Bubble Shield felt weak and insignificant. AL simply failed. Sprint and Jet Pack both worked reasonably well but would have been better off if they were universal, which happily, seems to be precisely what is happening.

The fact that sprint is in the game does not make Halo "like" other shooters. Gears 1 had sprint, does Gears qualify as fast paced? What determines the speed of the action is health, shields, weapon damage, not how mobile people are. If EVERYONE has Sprint, when one person runs away, the other person runs in pursuit. Hopefully, 343 will take us back to Halo 3 or 2 levels of shield, health, whatever. If anything, Reach's problem was that the Sprint AA was not universal. I'm not a fan of Reach compared to the other Halo's so don't accuse me of shilling for that but don't make these melodramatic proclamations about what "We" want. I just played H3 doubles last night with my friend as we used years ago...real nostalgia rush there. And you know what? If we all had Sprint it would not have been that different.

You watch the latest video? U Mad?

I wouldn't say that's really true...if I had an armor setting which say, IDK, gives me +5% shields but 10% less health, and represents this change by a slight cosmetic change to my armor, are you going to say this is a Reach style armor ability? If I unlock an attachment which gives me 5 more shotgun shells in battle, are you going to say this is an armor ability? How about something which makes my melee lunge distance bigger? There are a whole lot of things 343 can do with armor customization which would not necessarily resemble Reach's AA's. I think the abilities that Reach had should return but not as "Loadouts". Sprint should return but be universal, JetPacks should be modified as thrusters and return but be Universal (I could elaborate on that but it'd take awhile), Bubble Shield should be equipment, Hologram should be equipment, Camo should be a powerup and Armor Lock? AHHH! Just give us Over Shield as a power up too! I want my Red and Blue orbs or Triangles back!

I'm wondering what your "research" is...Boats in forge? Who thinks that is a pressing issue? I certainly have not heard about anyone even considering that until now.

In terms of what features they keep versus what they throw out, they should definitely look more to 3. But Reach did do some things right, such as the voting for maps r the playlist variety. I don't think its as simple as "make it like Reach or 3". Reach simply happened to have more bad changes than good, but 343 should take the good stuff from both Reach and 3.

Anyone who asks for a return to elites in matchmaking is A-okay with me. Forge able enemies would also be good, though people gotta understand, actually implementing something like that would probably be really difficult for the developers...plus, you gotta think about how people would actually control these AI in their forge...would the AI have different difficulty levels, movement paths, weapon sets, etc etc...it could easily get pretty complicated. Being able to hold to throw a grenade farther seems like a bit of a stretch to me...its not as if that's what people do in real life, you just throw the grenade at a higher angle with greater strength...the current mechanics of aiming high to throw far seems good to me BUT being able to cook a grenade would be really cool with a Frag, as long as you could make it pretty clear how close the grenade was to detonation.