What will Halo 5 be?

[FesojNagod]

OK so I made a topic about 2 weeks ago explaining WHAT I THINK is wrong with the new features introduced with Halo Reach and Halo 4. That topic got locked and the reason I think was very... stupid really, so here I go again.

 

Basically there was people that said that I was completely wrong with everything I said and there was one guy that had the same mindset as me. I started of the topic with a video from HaloFollower, about another video where it says "Halo 5 Infinity Slayer on Haven". People said it's been confirmed by 343 to be a placeholder and people say "don't panic like that for such a small thing", they didn't said that with those words but that's basically what they meant. HOW CAN YOU NOT CARE ABOUT SMALL DETAILS LIKE THAT? Yeah how can you care about details like that that can possibly decide the future of a franchise that you really like.

 

I LOVE Halo, and I want it to succeed. I was NOT trying to bash 343 and throw **** in their face, I tried to give my personal view, that many Halo fans share, on the current state of Halo. I WAS NOT TRYING TO BASH 343 AND I KNOW THIS WAS THEIR FIRST GAME. THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE FANS TELL THEM WHAT WE WANT., THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THEY "SUCCEED" WITH THE NEXT TITLE.

 

Now, the word "succeed" will mean different things to different people. And I think people forgot that I was focusing on the competitive side of the game. First I want to say that I made an example why Armor Abilities "ruin" game flow and balance, and I said "imagine Construct from Halo 3 with jetpacks" and someone said that you can't make an example with an old map that was designed for a game without Armo Abilities, and that's completely right. I made a bad move, you can't really compare it like that.

 

BUT! I still don't think that EVERY PLAYER should have acces to an Armor Ability every time they spawn. I'm gonna try to summorise what another person said, we had Halo 1-3 (yes I will be refering to the old Halo games), they were very identical, had the same gameplay and game mechanics (almost). They changed minor things with every new release and they added minor things aswell. People loved Halo, people that played Halo 1 were playing Halo 2 and then Halo 3 (not all of them ofcourse, but compared to how many people that started from Halo 1 kept playing to Halo 3 COMPARED to how many people from Halo 3 was playing Reach and Halo 4)

 

So Halo was doing great, it had it's "spirit". When the new Halo game was released we knew what we was in for, but with the release of Reach, that completely changed. Bungie added MINOR things in Reach. The introduction of the Armor Abilities, and bloom. That's basically what they added into the game. Both things completely changed the way Halo was being played. You didn't have to think as much where you were going and what situation you would put yourself into, because if you made a mistake, BOOM! Sprint away and live to see another day. Or you had jetpack, or whatever, you had some way of getting out from what should have been a death because you were STUPID, but now you are alive. 

 

WIth Halo 4, sprint was no longer an Armor Ability, so you had sprint all the time + an AA. I know 343 added like, hickups if you were getting shot so you would slow down, and it's good that they saw what sprint would do and they tried to fix it. Sadly, I don't feel like it did the trick. You may disagree and that's completely 100% fine, this is my vision and view on Halo, not yours. 

 

Someone also said that sprint was not that bad as many keep saying it is, and that if I can't counter someone that's sprinting I'm bad and/or the other player is better. Reasonable argument except I'm STILL talking about you can get out of situations that should have gotten you killed. See, that's my problem with sprint. There has been MANY times that I've been in let's say Adrift, in one of the halls where the yellow lifts goes to, right? And there's someone coming behind me, and from the base and the middle. 3 against me, and they're coming from all directions. I should be dead, but I just hit sprint and then I'm fine. THAT'S MY PROBLEM WITH SPRINT, NOT THAT YOU CAN NINJA SOMEONE. 

 

As I said in my previous post, I don't like AA's, specifically the jetpack. If there's a position on the map that YOU FEEL IS A POWER POSITION, someone also said that there's no like, made power positions on the map, it's all how you can use the map and your team, so what is a power position to me might be a weak position for someone else and that's 100% right. But basically the person with jetpack can get to certain places faster than the people without. That's my problem with AA's, they take away what was a COMPLETELY EVEN SANDBOX, and gives certain players advantages because they have a different item than you, and it ofcourse comes with disadvantages aswell. But that's the thing, Halo had a completely even sandbox, and with AA's, that's not the case anymore. I'm not saying that I hate that I can use the AA's to my advantage, I really like using them because I can do crazy ****, but that's the problem. It gives me an unfair advantage. It adds randomness to the game, because you can have something that gives you the advantage in a specific situation and I have no way of knowing that, so the outcome of our meeting will not be determined by PURE SKILL, but also what items we have chosen. I think that it's alot of fun using the AA's, but that doesn't change the fact that I think they should be taken out of Halo.

 

We had this Halo that we knew what it was, but then Reach came and changed all that. Funny thing is when 343 got the "hold" of Halo, the first thing they did was to remove the AA's at spawn, and bloom from the MLG playlist. Again, I'm focusing on the competitive side of Halo. That's what 343 did. But then they re-added it into Halo 4. 

 

Someone also said that "why did Halo Reach has more players than Halo 3?" Why did SO, SO, SO MANY Halo fans stop playing Halo when Reach came out? Every new game is gonna get new fans and new players. People are gonna see it on ads or whatever and buy it. And many people will probably like it if it is a good game, THAT HALO REACH AND HALO 4 WAS. THEY WERE GOOD GAMES, NOT GOOD HALO GAMES.

 

And he also said why Halo 3 has such a low population. Well, as I've said, lots of people stopped playing it at the launch of Reach and Halo 3 has bad netcode and it plagued by lag. 

 

I also mentioned what I feel about the boltshot, and someone made an example that if I shot a guy on Halo 3 for example and he got away behind a corner, and I decided to chase him and then I die because he pulls out a shotgun. You can't compare it like that. This is the same person that said that I can't compare old maps with AA's to new maps with AA's, it's completely the same thing. The shotgun is a pickup weapon, there's 1 or 2 shotguns on the map, so the chance of that happening is very slim. And if it does happen, I won't rage because it happens so rarely. But the boltshot is basically a shotgun, that has a shorter range. BUT, here's the big BUT. The Boltshot is a SECONDARY WEAPON. 8 players in a game of 8 players can have a shotgun as their secondary at all times through the entire match. If you got caught in a short range it would be more beneficial to switch to your SECONDARY WEAPON FROM YOUR PRIMARY, if you didn't have a shotgun or whatever. The point is, that is too powerful for a secondary weapon. I'm not complaining that the boltshot is in the game, I'm complaining that it's a secondary weapon. SECONDARY, comes after first, PRIMARY WEAPON, SECONDARY WEAPON, the secondary should NEVER be better than the primary, that's why it's a secondary weapon, see? 

 

I also dislike recoil and flinch instead of descope. WIthout descope, you can be really, really, really, REALLY powerful with a sniper, even at close range. That's the most dangerous thing. Me personally find it a bit too easy to snipe without descope, and it really does make the sniper a super important weapon, but a bit too easy to use. Flinch and recoil does take away a bit of the skillgap aswell according to my personal experience. If you get into a sniper duel with someone, it's most of the time whoever hits the first shot that gets the kill, because as soon as you get shot by a sniper, your crosshair goes flying into space and since you're still scoped in, you can't look back down in time. I know that the flinch is there for hindering snipers and long-range weapons, but using descope instead will actually work better in my opinion. And recoil is just a lazy way to make mastering the weapons a bit harder. Atleast I feel like recoil is the lazy way to do it, and I don't like it, same thing with bloom. It adds randomness to the game, and even if your crosshair is 100% on-point, you might still miss. I know this was the case in Halo 1-3 aswell, but not nearly, not even close to the same extend as with bloom.

 

One thing that is incredible with Halo 4 is the netcode. It's on-point 99% of the time, and it doesn't feel like I'm playing online most of the time. 100% high five to 343 for the netcode.

 

Weapons dropped by players dissapear in like 5 seconds... Just, what the hell? I shouldn't have to explain why that is a problem, just try really hard to fix it for the next title please.

 

I think that's all I want to say. If you're reading this for some reason 343, you are going to get hate no matter how you make Halo 5. If you make Halo 5 like the "original" games, then your new fanbase will be pissed, but if you keep building from Halo 4 the old fanbase, what's left of it will be FURIOUS! And probably give up on Halo, because unlike Halo 4, the next Halo title will be on the next console so in order to play it you have to have the next-gen console. So that's gonna be really pricey, but with Halo 4 you already had a 360. 

 

I wish, obviously that you 343 would listen to the hard-core Halo fans because we are the ones that are gonna play your game until the next title gets released. I am NOT TRYING TO BASH 343, I KNOW THIS IS THEIR FIRST GAME AND I AM TRYING TO GIVE THEM MY VISION ON HALO. I wouldn't be writing this unless I didn't love the franchise. 

[MCPO Mayh3m]

To answer the question in the title: What will Halo 5 be?

 

Real shocker here... Halo 5.

 

It wont be Halo 3, it won't be Reach, heck... it won't even be Halo 4. Every Halo game we've had to date has been different.

 

Whether good or bad, they have all been different. Me personally? I prefer the Halo 2/3 style.

[BeckoningZebra1]

I actually like Armor Abilities. I think they add a new level of strategizing and preparation. In my opinion, if everyone has equal opportunity to the same armor abilities, (meaning, no DLC AA's) then the game is indeed balanced and fair.

 

I agree that the Boltshot, in its current state, is over-powered for loadouts. If its going to remain a loadout weapon it should either be nerfed to have a longer charge time or do only enough damage to lower the victim's shields.

 

I haven't really noticed a problem with weapons despawning too quickly, so I'm not sure what problems you're experiencing with this.

 

I want Halo 5's Team Slayer playlist to be like the following:

 

-Yes, Loadouts

-No, Plasma Grenades in loadouts

-Yes, AA's

-Yes, Sprint

-Yes, Going Prone/Dolphin Diving

-Yes, UNSC Aircraft

-No, Personal Ordnance

-Yes, Dynamic Map Features

 

Those are my own opinions, but something I really want Halo 5 to have, is more innovative Armor Abilities. I feel like they're a big part of what Halo is and I want there to be more diversity and uniqueness with each Armor Ability.

[Hater]

I personally feel that Halo should be a modified version of Halo 2/3. There should be only a few changes. A lot of people say that no change would make a game die, but compare Halo to Call of Duty.

 

Call of Duty hardly changes, yet manages to pull in hundreds of thousands of people online each day. All CoD games have the same base game mechanic which brings loads of people every new game.

 

Halo 4, on the other hand, is struggling to pull in 30k players online at a time if that. That is because it has changed so much. Halo 4 doesn't have the same base from Halo 2/3 which had hundreds of thousands playing at a time.

[FesojNagod]

I personally feel that Halo should be a modified version of Halo 2/3. There should be only a few changes. A lot of people say that no change would make a game die, but compare Halo to Call of Duty.

 

Call of Duty hardly changes, yet manages to pull in hundreds of thousands of people online each day. All CoD games have the same base game mechanic which brings loads of people every new game.

 

Halo 4, on the other hand, is struggling to pull in 30k players online at a time if that. That is because it has changed so much. Halo 4 doesn't have the same base from Halo 2/3 which had hundreds of thousands playing at a time.

EXACTLY! CoD hardly ever, ever changes, they even use the same engine for almost all games and basically just add new weapons and maps and perks and what-not. That's why they keep their fans and they love every game, Halo on the other hand has strayed away from what we knew as Halo.

 

I have the exact mindset as you!

I actually like Armor Abilities. I think they add a new level of strategizing and preparation. In my opinion, if everyone has equal opportunity to the same armor abilities, (meaning, no DLC AA's) then the game is indeed balanced and fair.

 

I agree that the Boltshot, in its current state, is over-powered for loadouts. If its going to remain a loadout weapon it should either be nerfed to have a longer charge time or do only enough damage to lower the victim's shields.

 

I haven't really noticed a problem with weapons despawning too quickly, so I'm not sure what problems you're experiencing with this.

 

I want Halo 5's Team Slayer playlist to be like the following:

 

-Yes, Loadouts

-No, Plasma Grenades in loadouts

-Yes, AA's

-Yes, Sprint

-Yes, Going Prone/Dolphin Diving

-Yes, UNSC Aircraft

-No, Personal Ordnance

-Yes, Dynamic Map Features

 

Those are my own opinions, but something I really want Halo 5 to have, is more innovative Armor Abilities. I feel like they're a big part of what Halo is and I want there to be more diversity and uniqueness with each Armor Ability.

IF AA's has to be in the next Halo game, I hope they make them as pick-ups, like a power-up. And I wish they would remove the loadouts aswell

 

The thing with the weapons despawning so quickly, it's actually a miracle that you haven't had any problems with it haha. If you die, and you drop your sniper at your body, like 10 seconds after it will be gone, that's what I meant.

 

And I think that any secondary weapon that has the chance to one hit kill is too powerful. If the boltshot remains in the next title, one way of doing it is so that it takes a tad bit longer to charge up, and after one shot you have to reload. This would make the Boltshot almost like the plasma pistol, only it is easier to actually hit and you fire multiple bullets at once, so it's actually better in close quarters, but still suffers the disadvantage that it can not disable vehicles for a few seconds, and it takes a bit longer to charge up and you have to reload. 

 

thank you for responding to my thread!

[SilentGamer64]

Regarding AA's, I believe that they should be on map equipment like Halo 3. However, instead of having every item be a one-time-use, the amount of uses would vary between pieces of equipment. For instance, thruster pack and hologram would have around 3-5 uses before being depleted of uses, while regen and bubble shield would have only one use. Equipment that is weaker will generally get more uses, while stronger equipment will have less uses. That being said, all equipment needs to be balanced accordingly to make players want to pick it up. They should be treated like power weapons, not little optional attachments to your armor that you can use on a whim.

 

People can try and compromise on Sprint all they want, but its either going to end up one of two ways:

1. Sprint stays in Halo as a standard base player ability.

2. Sprint is removed completely to recreate the Halo experience that the first three games achieved.

The only compromise that will come of sprint is going to be through custom game options. In the case of outcome 1, the closest thing to a compromise will be the ability to toggle it off in customs. In the case of outcome 2, the closest thing to a compromise is to allow sprint to be toggled on in customs. The reason why there will be no "half and half" in terms of sprint and no-sprint is due to the game's consistency. Maps need to be built either with or without sprint in mind. Same with Campaign levels. If maps are built with sprint in mind, players that have sprint toggled off are going to feel slow and sluggish, and the maps are going to feel too big for no-sprint gameplay. If maps are built without sprint in mind, players with sprint toggled on are going to feel cramped sprinting around maps the size of Guardian, and even BTB maps will probably feel like mid-sized maps instead of 8v8 materiel. There will be no compromise. 343i will either go one way or the other, and then throw a small bone at the half that wasn't satisfied with their decision through custom games. Maybe not even that.

 

With the amount of heat that they are going to get no matter which direction they take, I really don't envy 343i. Like, at all.

[FesojNagod]

Regarding AA's, I believe that they should be on map equipment like Halo 3. However, instead of having every item be a one-time-use, the amount of uses would vary between pieces of equipment. For instance, thruster pack and hologram would have around 3-5 uses before being depleted of uses, while regen and bubble shield would have only one use. Equipment that is weaker will generally get more uses, while stronger equipment will have less uses. That being said, all equipment needs to be balanced accordingly to make players want to pick it up. They should be treated like power weapons, not little optional attachments to your armor that you can use on a whim.

 

People can try and compromise on Sprint all they want, but its either going to end up one of two ways:

1. Sprint stays in Halo as a standard base player ability.

2. Sprint is removed completely to recreate the Halo experience that the first three games achieved.

The only compromise that will come of sprint is going to be through custom game options. In the case of outcome 1, the closest thing to a compromise will be the ability to toggle it off in customs. In the case of outcome 2, the closest thing to a compromise is to allow sprint to be toggled on in customs. The reason why there will be no "half and half" in terms of sprint and no-sprint is due to the game's consistency. Maps need to be built either with or without sprint in mind. Same with Campaign levels. If maps are built with sprint in mind, players that have sprint toggled off are going to feel slow and sluggish, and the maps are going to feel too big for no-sprint gameplay. If maps are built without sprint in mind, players with sprint toggled on are going to feel cramped sprinting around maps the size of Guardian, and even BTB maps will probably feel like mid-sized maps instead of 8v8 materiel. There will be no compromise. 343i will either go one way or the other, and then throw a small bone at the half that wasn't satisfied with their decision through custom games. Maybe not even that.

 

With the amount of heat that they are going to get no matter which direction they take, I really don't envy 343i. Like, at all.

 

Nice to see that someone elses agrees with my idea of making the AA's a pick-up, like a power-up! I personally feel like if that's what it becomes (which I don't think but I hope) then I think that you should have unlimited use as long as you have it, but ofcourse it has to recharge again. And I feel like the Jetpack and Evade/Thruster is good, solid AA pick-ups. And I also feel like the Thruster or whatever its name will be has to get buffed a bit, because now not everyone has it, it's a power-up, almost like the evade. Players should feel the need to control it.

 

And ofcourse there's lots more ideas that can come up on this topic that making the AA's into power-ups on the map! And it can change how many of them there are on the map. Let's say there's 2 Jetpacks on one map, and then there's only one Thruster on the other. Just an idea, because you can either have the AA's as a power-up, so you need to control the map in order to get it, or you could give both teams one Jetpack for example. I personally feel like only ONE on the map, so you need to have map control.

 

And what you said about sprint is 100% true. They can't make the game suitable for both, really because as you said the maps have to be designed for either sprint or no sprint. I'm hoping for NO SPRINT, but I doubt that will be the case.

[Silent Orbis]

I think that every game has to change. Mechanics have to change. Controls have to change. Even Master Chief lol. So, as developers they want to stick out. Every developers dream is to create something new and unique, which no one can dare to match. While Halo 4 had se good changes, and some bad - Halo 5 is going to have heavy fan influence because of all the hate 343i's been getting.

[Zeth Maverick]

I truly hope that 343i brings halo back to what it was, but the way it is now is nowhere near where it should be. Halo 5 will be Halo 5 regardless of how we feel about it. What Halo 5 will become, is another question Will it become the next great Multiplayer clan experience and satisfy the Halo 2 crowd? Will it become the old-school hardcores dream game and attract the Halo 3 guys? Or will it just become a custom game haven like Reach and drawn in the attention of a broad group of gamers? I cant wait to see!  

[Is not JL]

One thing that is incredible with Halo 4 is the netcode. It's on-point 99% of the time, and it doesn't feel like I'm playing online most of the time. 100% high five to 343 for the netcode.

I.........what?

 

Have you not been in games which are largely dominated by black screens? Where you haven't been kicked out at the game's start or during the game purely because the game has a bad net-code? Even still, while YOU might be enjoying some good games, a lot of other people certainly aren't.

 

I can agree with some of the things you say, disagree with some of the others, but this is the one thing that I will outright deny. Your point of view on Halo 4's net code is probably one that is limited just to what you see, and I'm telling you right now you aren't seeing everything.

 

Halo 4's net code isn't good.

[Vaulting♥Frog]

I find it amusing that you are trying to keep Halo from being more CoD like with the logic of not changing the gameplay or changing it so little that it virtually is the same game.... which is what CoD does. So Halo will stop being like CoD by being like CoD...

 

Brilliant.

[Is not JL]

I find it amusing that you are trying to keep Halo from being more CoD like with the logic of not changing the gameplay or changing it so little that it virtually is the same game.... which is what CoD does. So Halo will stop being like CoD by being like CoD...

 

Brilliant.

I think when he wrote that he meant that he didn't want the gameplay of Halo to change into something that is similar to CoD, aka the generic shooter formula those games have, and to have Halo stay similar to it's original online multiplayer which feels waaaaay more like an arena shooter than CoD's arcade shooter feel. It's counter-productive to want Halo to completely be not-like Call of Duty, but it doesn't help Halo at all if you try to develop it to feel exactly like all the other shooters out there.

 

Every game is gonna have similarities and differences; allegedly, Halo 5 is going to be a video game played on the Xbone - same with Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, or main series Call of Duty number 12. Similarities. But their gameplay has many differences as well.

 

You can definitely argue that Halo can 'stop being like CoD' by 'being like CoD', but it's once you specify exactly what part of Halo and what part of CoD you're making similar/different that the argument begins to make sense.

______________________________________________________________________________

 

I would rather there be innovation than for things to stay the same. To the people who basically want more players in Halo 3/Halo 2, you got it. The MCC is your wish come true and if you don't like Halo 5 you can easily fall back on that. But innovation is what drives improvement, and if it weren't for our ability to innovate then everything would be at a mediocre/crappy level and it wouldn't get better. Halo CE, Halo 2, Halo 3, Halo: Reach, Halo 4 all had their good parts, some better than the other, but if Halo 5 is meant to be a better game than all the previous we should be developing it to change it up, not to be the same. Be inspired by old games? Sure! But be the same? That's just a silly, contrived thought.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Meteor Storm