Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: The Only BR Thread
  • Subject: The Only BR Thread
Subject: The Only BR Thread

Multiplayer Gameplay
Halo:CE------------------Reach--------Halo2-----------------H alo3
Campaign Experience
Reach----Halo:CE-----------------ODST-----Halo2---------Halo3

Glad that Halo 3 garbage is dead, thanks to Reach.
Unfreakenbelievable!!

Yeah. Realism has nothing to do with why the BR functions the way it does. It's Bungie's way of balancing the weapons in order to make gameplay more enjoyable. Unfortunately for me and many others, inconsistent ranges makes for more frustrating gameplay. Then, add that to the inconsistency of the online aspect of Halo 3 and you are in for a far from enjoyable experience.

If so many of you gamers are in for realism, then play CoD4, which to many is more fun anyway. The guns have more range and the bulllets don't disappear.

  • 11.07.2008 4:07 PM PDT

There are many powers in the world, for good or for evil. Some are greater than I am. Against some I have not yet been measured. But my time is coming.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forum Rules
List of Forum Ninjas

Posted by:Nokterne Posted by: Old Papa Rich
Please stop using the realism argument. Do you actually think it's possible for real plasma to behave the way it does in Halo 3?

FACT: None of the Halo games are even close to being realistic.

Also, if Halo WAS realistic, you wouldn't be playing it. Entertainment and functionality are more important then realism.
Posted by: TheBigShow
I agree; the spread should simulate the real spread of an automatic rifle. Lets take a look at a current real life rifle that can be compared to the battle rifle, the m16. Lets just browse through some stats here... 3 round burst, yes, that sounds about right... lets just take a look at the range now...

WOA! Apparently the "real life" counterpart to the BR shoots three-round bursts at an effective range of over 500 meters. That means it can hit a target within a few inches at 500 meters, assuming proper aim, every time. Hmmm, the BR seems to only shoot accurate bursts at 30 meters, if that. That doesn't sound realistic at all, especially considering 500 years of new technology that would be included in the BR.

So if you're going to use the "realism" argument, which is stupid to begin with, at least get your facts straight. The BR spread is in no way "realistic."
You guys have both take the comparison way out of context. Keep it simple. Does an automatic rifle have a spread? The short answer is yes. Hell, does a real pistol always land exactly where you aim it? The short answer is no. The point I was making is that this was Bungie's goal. As far as I'm conncerned, it works. I will say, maybe you won't get too hung up on the idea if I use the word approximate instead of simulate. And, just because a game is complete fantasy, doesn't mnean there can't be elements that are designed to approximate real life behaviors. You can go on about what is not realistic. We could make an even longer list about what is. The bottom line, Bungie was trrying to immitate real automatic rifle spreds within the context of their game.

  • 11.07.2008 7:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Old Papa Rich
You guys have both take the comparison way out of context. Keep it simple. Does an automatic rifle have a spread? The short answer is yes. Hell, does a real pistol always land exactly where you aim it? The short answer is no. The point I was making is that this was Bungie's goal. As far as I'm conncerned, it works. I will say, maybe you won't get too hung up on the idea if I use the word approximate instead of simulate. And, just because a game is complete fantasy, doesn't mnean there can't be elements that are designed to approximate real life behaviors. You can go on about what is not realistic. We could make an even longer list about what is. The bottom line, Bungie was trrying to immitate real automatic rifle spreds within the context of their game.

Gameplay and consistency should never be sacrificed for a poor imitation of realism.

  • 11.07.2008 8:52 PM PDT

Multiplayer Gameplay
Halo:CE------------------Reach--------Halo2-----------------H alo3
Campaign Experience
Reach----Halo:CE-----------------ODST-----Halo2---------Halo3

Glad that Halo 3 garbage is dead, thanks to Reach.
Unfreakenbelievable!!

Posted by: Old Papa Rich
You guys have both take the comparison way out of context. Keep it simple. Does an automatic rifle have a spread? The short answer is yes. Hell, does a real pistol always land exactly where you aim it? The short answer is no. The point I was making is that this was Bungie's goal. As far as I'm conncerned, it works. I will say, maybe you won't get too hung up on the idea if I use the word approximate instead of simulate. And, just because a game is complete fantasy, doesn't mnean there can't be elements that are designed to approximate real life behaviors. You can go on about what is not realistic. We could make an even longer list about what is. The bottom line, Bungie was trrying to immitate real automatic rifle spreds within the context of their game.

You make a good point. Maybe this is why I will be playing mostly GoW2 from now on.

However, Bungie's main goal was to make the gameplay enjoyable, which involves controlling the ranges and balancing the weapons. Realism most likely took a back seat when designing elements in the game.

  • 11.07.2008 10:38 PM PDT

Can I haz security.

BR



[Edited on 11.08.2008 1:35 AM PST]

  • 11.08.2008 1:35 AM PDT

There are many powers in the world, for good or for evil. Some are greater than I am. Against some I have not yet been measured. But my time is coming.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forum Rules
List of Forum Ninjas

Posted by: Breezy131
Gameplay and consistency should never be sacrificed for a poor imitation of realism.
The BR is consistent. It has a limited efective range. Consistently.

  • 11.08.2008 4:54 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Battle Rifle spread. LOL

  • 11.08.2008 6:41 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Old Papa Rich
Posted by: Breezy131
Gameplay and consistency should never be sacrificed for a poor imitation of realism.
The BR is consistent. It has a limited efective range. Consistently.

No, it most certainly is not consistent. How the hell can you call it consistent when it's so obviously random?

Yes, it's consistent within a limited range, but that limit is ridiculously short. Calling the Battle Rifle a medium to long range weapon is a blatant lie.

  • 11.08.2008 9:15 AM PDT
  • gamertag: BJRSCJ
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Breezy131
Posted by: Old Papa Rich
Posted by: Breezy131
Gameplay and consistency should never be sacrificed for a poor imitation of realism.
The BR is consistent. It has a limited efective range. Consistently.

No, it most certainly is not consistent. How the hell can you call it consistent when it's so obviously random?

Yes, it's consistent within a limited range, but that limit is ridiculously short. Calling the Battle Rifle a medium to long range weapon is a blatant lie.


Come on, Breezy. You know the BR is extremely consistent....consistently inconsistent. While I definitely don't want the H2 BR back, I am noticing more and more how worthless, random, and lucky the BR is at any range. I hold to your ideas that the BR should be limited in range by the skill of the player, however, moreso than a luck factor. A consistent, non-random spread would allow one to compensate at range and aim accordingly, while becoming too great to land all three shots at range. Not to mention, with the hitscan how it is, you have to lead your targets. I completely agree that the BR needs tweaked, so long as you make the BR skillful to use.

I think most people who are against it think as I thought. If you look back to my original posts in this thread, I was adamantly against it. But playing more I realize how bad and lucky the BR actually is. I just still have a bad taste in my mouth from the gameplay the H2 BR brought along with the lack of skill such a weapon took. In H3 I don't want almost every other weapon to be useless. I also don't want to get dominated by the first team to get the good ground because they have an all powerful weapon that anyone can use. If I get dominated, I want it to be because people are good. I want a BR that is good in good hands and not very good in bad hands. Give us a more accurate BR, but please make it skillful. I think that's why a lot of people are against changing the current BR.

[Edited on 11.08.2008 9:33 AM PST]

  • 11.08.2008 9:29 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: fifthderelicte
Come on, Breezy. You know the BR is extremely consistent....consistently inconsistent. While I definitely don't want the H2 BR back, I am noticing more and more how worthless, random, and lucky the BR is at any range. I hold to your ideas that the BR should be limited in range by the skill of the player, however, moreso than a luck factor. A consistent, non-random spread would allow one to compensate at range and aim accordingly, while becoming too great to land all three shots at range. Not to mention, with the hitscan how it is, you have to lead your targets. I completely agree that the BR needs tweaked, so long as you make the BR skillful to use.

It's not so much worthless at any range as it is at medium or so range. If your enemy has a Sniper Rifle or Laser than the battle is greatly biased toward them because of how inconsistent the Battle Rifle is, despite the fact that those weapons were intended for long range and the BR for medium range.

I think most people who are against it think as I thought.
I think that the reason most people oppose it - the kind of people who come into this thread only to say "teh Br iz fine get ovr it n00bs" - don't even understand why people complained in the first place or don't want to disagree with Bungie. I guess they just don't see what's wrong with inconsistency and a shallow learning curve.

[Edited on 11.08.2008 12:28 PM PST]

  • 11.08.2008 9:44 AM PDT
  • gamertag: BJRSCJ
  • user homepage:

Well, I've always been against luck and would much rather have skill, but the H2 BR was not the embodiment of skill, IMO. And that's what I originally thought everyone was arguing about.

  • 11.08.2008 10:11 AM PDT

Posted by: fifthderelicte
Well, I've always been against luck and would much rather have skill, but the H2 BR was not the embodiment of skill, IMO. And that's what I originally thought everyone was arguing about.
'

Oh no, no! I want the exact opposite of the Halo 2 BR. That game was a huge failure, and I dislike it even more. The BR needs to limit the player based on their skill, not uncontrollable factors like randomized spread. I want the BR to have a longer effective range, with a tighter spread but much less bullet and reticle magnetism.

  • 11.08.2008 10:38 AM PDT

Why let the noob finish his fusion coil tower when you can blow it to bits and kill him? :P

I agree with Pk 4 Skillz1, if you dont like the thing dont use it.
I find that there is nothing wrong with it.

  • 11.08.2008 2:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Too many idiots have been agreeing with this post for me to not dissect it nice and neat.

Posted by: Pk 4 Skillz1
*The BR was designed with strengths and weaknesses.

Its weaknesses, among other things, include little to no consistency and an optimal range less than the distance you can throw grenades.

*The weaknesses were added in to offset the strengths.
What strengths? The Sniper Rifle beats it medium and long range and the Assault Rifle beats it close range. It's only useful when coupled with a grenade or against an unshielded opponent.

*It takes skill to use the BR like JonnyOThan said.
Relative to what? It's easy to get a headshot with and within its optimal range the auto-aim helps the player out a lot. The only situation in which it's difficult to use is long range, but that's outside the range at which the Battle Rifle functions properly so there's no point.

*The BR is as effective as it was designed to be.
I guess consistency is overrated, then.

*Bungie DOESNT have to fix the BR because it is the way they want it to be.
No they don't but I swear to god making things act predictably isn't a bad thing. The Assault Rifle, Plasma Rifle, and SMG can be fired in such a way that their bursts and random tendencies are mitigated; why not the Battle Rifle?

So, if you don't like the BR there is one real simple solution.......................Don't Use It
Yeah, because without a reliable alternative like the Sniper Rifle, I'm really going to march across a map - any map, it doesn't have to be big - with a gun that has a practical range of about five feet.

  • 11.08.2008 3:23 PM PDT

There are many powers in the world, for good or for evil. Some are greater than I am. Against some I have not yet been measured. But my time is coming.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forum Rules
List of Forum Ninjas

If the BR is so broken and random, why is it ithat the best players destroy their oppponants with it? Anyway, the spread has to be random. If it were absolutely predictable, it might as well be the H2 laser beam BR.

  • 11.08.2008 4:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Old Papa Rich
If the BR is so broken and random, why is it ithat the best players destroy their oppponants with it?

The Battle Rifle can kill people, obviously, it's just that the gun behaves so unpredictably. That's the whole point of all the test videos people made - to demonstrate that two players could be in the exact same situation, every factor (aim, distance, elevation, whatever) unchanged, and the results will vary.

Anyway, the spread has to be random. If it were absolutely predictable, it might as well be the H2 laser beam BR.
For one thing, I didn't play Halo 2 that much so I can't believe you'd think I'm arguing for the Halo 2 BR.

Secondly, making the spread predictable would not make it as accurate as a "laser beam". Removing the random tendencies would make it just as accurate as the spread is now, only consistent.

  • 11.08.2008 5:36 PM PDT

There are many powers in the world, for good or for evil. Some are greater than I am. Against some I have not yet been measured. But my time is coming.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forum Rules
List of Forum Ninjas

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree. The random spread makes sense ot me. No mechanism is completely predictable.

  • 11.08.2008 7:11 PM PDT
  • gamertag: BJRSCJ
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Breezy131
Too many idiots have been agreeing with this post for me to not dissect it nice and neat.

Posted by: Pk 4 Skillz1
*The BR was designed with strengths and weaknesses.

Its weaknesses, among other things, include little to no consistency and an optimal range less than the distance you can throw grenades.

*The weaknesses were added in to offset the strengths.
What strengths? The Sniper Rifle beats it medium and long range and the Assault Rifle beats it close range. It's only useful when coupled with a grenade or against an unshielded opponent.

*It takes skill to use the BR like JonnyOThan said.
Relative to what? It's easy to get a headshot with and within its optimal range the auto-aim helps the player out a lot. The only situation in which it's difficult to use is long range, but that's outside the range at which the Battle Rifle functions properly so there's no point.

*The BR is as effective as it was designed to be.
I guess consistency is overrated, then.

*Bungie DOESNT have to fix the BR because it is the way they want it to be.
No they don't but I swear to god making things act predictably isn't a bad thing. The Assault Rifle, Plasma Rifle, and SMG can be fired in such a way that their bursts and random tendencies are mitigated; why not the Battle Rifle?

So, if you don't like the BR there is one real simple solution.......................Don't Use It
Yeah, because without a reliable alternative like the Sniper Rifle, I'm really going to march across a map - any map, it doesn't have to be big - with a gun that has a practical range of about five feet.


Very good points. Adding to that, if the spread were still left in, but it were predictable, you could use skill to adjust your aiming based on the distance, and beyond a certain point, it would be impossible to land all three bullets, thus limiting its range (the spread increases over distance, meaning at X distance, your spread would land at least one bullet outside of the vertical height of a spartan). However, as long as there is any spread, headshots will be way too easy with the BR.

The other post also makes a very good point. Those against changing the BR argue that most good people have it as their TOD, therefore it is good. But the issue isn't whether or not it kills, but whether or not the better player always wins. With the random BR, I could have better aim in a battle and still lose based on random tendencies.

  • 11.08.2008 7:31 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i can see where people think that for example when looking at the br from first person it does look pretty -blam!- but in pics etc its still my go-to gun.

  • 11.08.2008 7:41 PM PDT

Posted by: UberZeO666
The BR takes skill to use now. And everyone is gonna have to deal with it


makes the game and MLG more spicey

  • 11.08.2008 9:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I find this continuous argument over the Battle Rifle useless. People are saying Battle Rifles are too strong because they either can't use i or have no personal liking of he weapon. I personally like the Battle Rifle, but that mater aside, if Bungie removed the Battle Rifle it would be a short matter of time before people found another weapon with a "fault" to their precious "newbish" game-play styles.

[Edited on 11.08.2008 9:43 PM PST]

  • 11.08.2008 9:43 PM PDT

Does anyone even read these?

Why is there a function making us lead our shots? Sorry Bungie but this is a console game, not a computer game. Leading your shots just doesn't work with a BR in Halo.

  • 11.09.2008 2:39 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: BadBall3r47
Why is there a function making us lead our shots? Sorry Bungie but this is a console game, not a computer game. Leading your shots just doesn't work with a BR in Halo.


Ahem.. before you complain about leading shots.. try playing Halo PC with ~150 ping

then you can complain :)

Anyone thinking a dedi would work to better registry is dead wrong...

  • 11.09.2008 4:27 AM PDT

There are many powers in the world, for good or for evil. Some are greater than I am. Against some I have not yet been measured. But my time is coming.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Forum Rules
List of Forum Ninjas

The thing to remember is that all weapons have a spread. None of them hit exactly on the target every time. The BR just gets singled out because it is so heavily used and so much is expected of it. As for the argument about better players winning: they do, regularly. Life is full of random action. The game developers added a little to keep things interesting. It is no different than if they added a "weapon misfire" feature. Just like in many aspects of your life, sometimes you can do everything right, and still fail. It is just one more challenge of the competition. How you handle adversity is just as important as your aim.

  • 11.09.2008 4:59 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: fifthderelicte
But the issue isn't whether or not it kills, but whether or not the better player always wins. With the random BR, I could have better aim in a battle and still lose based on random tendencies.

Yep. The better player should always win, but now it's all pretty much about who shot first and who got luckier. That shouldn't be.

Posted by: BadBall3r47
Why is there a function making us lead our shots? Sorry Bungie but this is a console game, not a computer game. Leading your shots just doesn't work with a BR in Halo.

Particularly with a burst fire weapon... But it's only really bad when there's a crappy host.

Posted by: WtF HaX FtW
Ahem.. before you complain about leading shots.. try playing Halo PC with ~150 ping

then you can complain :)

Done, and done.

Posted by: Old Papa Rich
The thing to remember is that all weapons have a spread. None of them hit exactly on the target every time.

The Laser, the Sniper Rifles...

Life is full of random action. The game developers added a little to keep things interesting.
There's no way you can really think that.

It is no different than if they added a "weapon misfire" feature
That. Would. SUCK.

Just like in many aspects of your life, sometimes you can do everything right, and still fail.
Real life != Video games.

It is just one more challenge of the competition.
No it's not. It's capping the player's individual skill and ensuring the better player doesn't always win - which is the whole point of competition.

How you handle adversity is just as important as your aim.
How are you going to handle something that's random? You can't fire the Battle Rifle in any way to mitigate the randomness. You're rolling dice every time you fire.

  • 11.09.2008 6:29 AM PDT