Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Veto Function Capability
  • Subject: Veto Function Capability
Subject: Veto Function Capability

Fight for what you believe in!

After playing Halo 3 matchmaking for a couple of years I know that people are often dissatisfied when they veto a map with gametype slayer(in hopes for Team BRs) and they get something completely different, e.g., oddball on Construct.

As a result, I think it would be a good idea to have two veto functions, one for map and one for gametype.

Press x to veto map.
Press y or b to veto gametype.

The buttons can be whatever. Just let me know what you think.




[Edited on 10.31.2009 10:54 AM PDT]

  • 10.31.2009 10:53 AM PDT

i hate many people, i am also like many of those people... that makes me a hypocrite
join the:
ninja acadame
the last of the warriors

after playing red faction guerilla today, i have to say this looks familiar to wrecking crew, but to be fair if that happened i would veto team BRs, not that i can't use BRs [i proved to my friends today i can be good with them] i just don't like them and would love to spite BR lovers

  • 10.31.2009 10:56 AM PDT

Here’s what Luke had to say about the differences in treatment between the Spartans and Elites in Reach:

“Instead of piece-by-piece customization like the Spartans, Elite customization is a full model swap with models selected from the various Elite classes appearing throughout the Campaign. There are all kinds of reasons for this, not the least of which is our continued emphasis on the Spartan as your identity in Reach.”

I would rather have GOW's system.

That game shows you 2 maps that are available for selection. You press the right trigger to pick the map on the right, and the left trigger to pick the map on the left. If there is a tie, it goes to a 3rd unrevealed map.

You could also apply that to gametypes.

After you select the map, you would be prompted with 2 gametypes. You then press the trigger of the gametype you want, or it will go to a 3rd tiebreaker gametype (or if there are only 2 in the playlist, randomly pick one)

  • 10.31.2009 10:59 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

I honestly would just prefer it didn't exist. Less ability to complain about which game type might come up next. The real issue is filtering out the game types that people are split on.

  • 10.31.2009 10:59 AM PDT

Fight for what you believe in!

I have only ever played GOW1 and I don't recall that system. It seems to be based on their choice system in single player. It seems like a pretty efficient system, but I don't know how likely it would be for Bungie to replicate their system like that.

I still like a little anonymity in the map and gametype though.

  • 10.31.2009 11:04 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member
  • gamertag: Kalriq
  • user homepage:

Twitter.
WyIdfyre: 'lol, who the hell would even wear those?'
AuSam: 'lol, who the hell would even have sex with dogs?'

-K-

Good idea, although sometimes it would get annoying.
-K-

  • 10.31.2009 11:06 AM PDT

Fight for what you believe in!

Posted by: Kalriq
Good idea, although sometimes it would get annoying.
-K-


What makes you think it would get annoying? Just wondering.

  • 10.31.2009 11:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Uncle Kulikov
I would rather have GOW's system.

That game shows you 2 maps that are available for selection. You press the right trigger to pick the map on the right, and the left trigger to pick the map on the left. If there is a tie, it goes to a 3rd unrevealed map.

You could also apply that to gametypes.

After you select the map, you would be prompted with 2 gametypes. You then press the trigger of the gametype you want, or it will go to a 3rd tiebreaker gametype (or if there are only 2 in the playlist, randomly pick one)


a decent system. normally, i'm against stealing things from other FPS's, but this doesn't really impact gameplay, and it is much more democratic.

  • 10.31.2009 11:50 AM PDT

Mythical Group

There is no greater catharsis than arguing on the Flood.

Deja Vu, I've seen this thread before, OP.

I don't agree though. I'll suck it up and play with what the system reccomends.

  • 10.31.2009 11:53 AM PDT

""We meet again, young one. I am the last of those who gave you breath and shape and form, millions of years ago. I am the last of those your kind rose up and ruthlessly destroyed. And our answer is at hand."

I hate it. All I really want to play is CTF at Valhalla. That's the single best games

  • 10.31.2009 12:37 PM PDT

Fight for what you believe in!

Posted by: Macles0007
I hate it. All I really want to play is CTF at Valhalla. That's the single best games


With the system I proposed, you would be able to veto Assault on Valhalla in hopes for Multi-Flag on Valhalla.

  • 10.31.2009 1:06 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

pretty good idea Cody.

  • 10.31.2009 1:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

(-_-) Bored Face

It has annoyed me a few times when we were about to play a map I realy like, but the gametype sucked so I had to say no to both. Wait, there should be a option to still veto both the gametype and map. I didn't see that in your first post.

[Edited on 10.31.2009 2:00 PM PDT]

  • 10.31.2009 1:58 PM PDT

Fight for what you believe in!

I believe this is a functionality that could still be implemented at this stage in the Reach building process.

  • 10.31.2009 4:35 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Do not waste your tears, I was not born to watch the world grow dim. Life is not measured in years, but by the deeds of men.

Posted by: goldhawk
We should know better, because we are better.

Posted by: Uncle Kulikov
I would rather have GOW's system.

That game shows you 2 maps that are available for selection. You press the right trigger to pick the map on the right, and the left trigger to pick the map on the left. If there is a tie, it goes to a 3rd unrevealed map.

You could also apply that to gametypes.

After you select the map, you would be prompted with 2 gametypes. You then press the trigger of the gametype you want, or it will go to a 3rd tiebreaker gametype (or if there are only 2 in the playlist, randomly pick one)
The GoW system was well implemented allowing the majority to get a game and map they liked making the game more enjoyable.

  • 10.31.2009 4:59 PM PDT

Nice idea, but it would be better if you have the normal veto, but it shows you the map that would be played if vetoed the original one. For example, the original map + gametype is slayer on Valhalla, and the alternative map would be like team BRs on Snowbound. U could decide whether 2 veto or not, without having to go clueless and hoping for a good map.
Besides, how many times has it happened that you vetoed Slayer on Construct in hope of slayer BRs and got Oddball on Epitaph??

  • 10.31.2009 5:17 PM PDT

What's up? You can call me Phil. I love to play Battlefield 3!
________________
Look for the signs, the keepers of the flame.
They will lead you to war, and perhaps, to vic7ory.

This has been suggested before and I hope they do implement this into Reach.

  • 10.31.2009 5:19 PM PDT

Fight for what you believe in!

Posted by: philace117
This has been suggested before and I hope they do implement this into Reach.


I searched for topics relating to game vetoes. I had no luck on the matter.

Overall, I just think the current veto system could and should be better.

  • 10.31.2009 7:09 PM PDT