- TheBigShow
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
Posted by: MadroKurgan
This may be one of the least of my concerns, but for the love of Beelzebub, put the cross hair back in the dead center of the screen. There is noting unique or advantageous about having it lower.
Wow, I can't believe I forgot this one. Yeah, this is one of those head-scratchers Bungie throws in there. I would love for it to be back to center screen.
Posted by: Twolf88
i agree with most of the things op said, what i dont agree with is the strafing idea and the return of the old meele system, other than that, all the other changes would meen we would be playing halo ce mp again, since most of those things were in halo ce (balanced vehicles, fall damage, no dueling, etc) which i think is a great idea cause halo ce mp was the best
Whats wrong with a more usefull strafe? The point of strafing is to avoid enemy fire, and its a very important skill to develop and use. It adds immensly to the depth of combat. I don't see how thats a bad thing.
Posted by: Redraven1992
ya i pretty much agree with a move away from close range but it should still remain a good 2/5th the weapon combat
2/5th being med range and 1/5th being long renge
I'm not saying close range should become obsolete. I think it should be a large part of the game. However, I think levels should dictate what weapons you use. For instance, in certain areas of the levels, close range weapons are much better, so intelligent players will use them. I'm just tired of using close range weapons not because the level calls for it, but because thats all we're given.
Posted by: DuelTerror
This never really seemed like a problem in halo 3, and ive never seen a rocket curve in the air either.
You may not have noticed it, but they most certainly do. If you did see one curve, wouldn't you agree that its ridiculous?
Posted by: DuelTerror
The melle system seems fine now, all it needs is a little less damage and a shorter range.
So you're okay with being able to melee someone whos directly below you, even if you're looking straight ahead? You're okay with meleeing and turning 100 degrees to hit the enemy?
Posted by: DuelTerror
Fall damage would just ruin things in halo, like it did in halo 1's mutliplayer. If there was fall damage, it would just be inconvience, it would take longer to get to places from high up places.
There are very few levels, even in Halo 3, where fall damage would be a hinderance. If you think about it, there really aren't very many levels with high-tiered geometry.
Posted by: DuelTerror
are you saying that weapons should kill faster, but be less accurate? or are you meaning weapons should have more recoil. Im not sure what you mean by weapons being "harder to use".
Weapons should kill faster and be more accurate but they should be much harder to hit people with due to decrease aim assist and increased strafe speed.
Posted by: DuelTerror
I dont really get what your saying here....
Strafing is when you move your player back and forth in a lateral direction. In Halo 3, no matter how fast you move your thumbstick, the game limits how fast your player changes direction. You strafe in a very slow, gradual, easy to follow motion, which practically negates the purpose of strafing. I would like to see the speed at which you change directions increased to a more reasonable level.
Posted by: DuelTerror
it all looks the same to me in all halo games....
But it isn't.
Posted by: TXBADAZZ3365
p.s. Stop correcting everyone they're just opinions
Yes, and opinions should be as informed as possible. I'm not "correcting" anyone, I'm continuing the discussion because I am truly interested in MP balance and I think that people appreciate being responded to.
Posted by: Hale 079
Well to begin with, I think you're a bit misinformed. If Bungie wanted to make Halo 3 more accessible to players, reducing auto-aim, weaker grenades that need more precision and a harder to use BR and Sniper aren't the answer. I think it's a common misconception that Bungie was purposely trying to cater exclusively to newer players. Maybe it's because of the AR and it's full auto fire, and how easy it is to use as a result.
Maybe they weren't intentionally trying to cater to new players, but thats what happened in the end. The end result is what I'm concerned with, not their intentions. And theres nothing wrong with catering to newer players, but there is a problem when you do so to the detrement of the overal gameplay and skill curve.
Posted by: Hale 079
That in mind, if you think about it even Halo 2 could have been deemed "accessible to new players". I don't have to go on about how easy it was to snipe, how the BR was an automatic 4-shot. The only thing that newer players wouldn't be expected to do id learn all the button combos.
You have me mistaken; I think Halo 2 is even worse than Halo 3.
Posted by: Hale 079
I want Halo:Reach to be a new experience and not Halo 4. That said, all the ideas so far were for an improved Halo 3. What Halo really needs gentlemen, is a new gameplay mechanic. Or two. Because a lot of the hardcore, I expect, and a lot of casual players are going to turn up their noses at yet another "control power weapon, throw grenades, snipe" Halo game. It's been the third generation. Let Bungie innovate, and let's help them.
Innovation doesn't have to take the form of huge changes. Halo has a very, very solid foundation, they should innovate by tweaking the gameplay to be as good as it possibly could be.
Posted by: the contact
B and C.
You can't have both, it simply won't work online. There are amazing things as far as internet technology, but you can't have the br be like it was in halo 2 with less aim assist. No connection is perfect, and they want a game that plays well online. Besides you want other people to be able to pick up the game and be able to handle it. They want to draw a larger crowd not slim it down.
The Halo 2 BR has terrible aim assist. I want to move as far from that as possible. The sniper rifle works just fine, and it has little aim assist and long range. The game would work just fine without the massive aim assist we currently have.
I don't think decreasing it would have an adverse affect on newer players. Newer players would be playing other newer players, so they wouldn't be getting dominated.
Posted by: Idomeneus
Does ANYONE remember how grenades in Halo CE worked? They HAD to be ON the ground in order to explode, made them extremely unique to Halo in my opinion, honestly, those grenades actually MADE the Halo experience HALO to me back when the original came out, as well as the pistol of course.
Yes, I loved them; the timer didn't begin until the grenade came to rest. It made for very tactical, skillful grenade gameplay. I don't think Bungie will revert to this style though, unfortunately.
Posted by: SnakeRunner40
Why not instead say, "Bow down to MLG and don't listen to anyone else."? I mean, seriously, if they do that I might rethink buying this game, and I don't even think ODST is overpriced. This sounds like something MLG would compile.
All these suggestions are for the betterment of gameplay for everyone. Just because you have some unfounded bias against MLG has no bearing on this discussion.
Posted by: SnakeRunner40
A bunch of useless drivel with absolutely no backing argument or intelligent point.
This thread is for discussions, not temper tantrums.
Posted by: Mr Gruntsworthy
to OP: So, in a nutshell, Halo 1. Go play Halo 1 if you want to play Halo 1, everything you suggested sounds like Halo 1 to me.
Actually, I enjoy many features from all Halo games. I would like the gameplay to be more focused on player ability and a little faster paced. I love Halo CE, and if it had online play, I would play that exclusively. Unfortunately, thats not the case. If you have a problem with Halo Reach when it comes out, how about YOU go play Halo 3 instead?