Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Who is playtesting Halo3 for balance?
  • Subject: Who is playtesting Halo3 for balance?
Subject: Who is playtesting Halo3 for balance?
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

You face an opponent who has never known defeat, who laughs in foreign tongues at your efforts to survive. This is Reply suicide.

"Oh Molly Connoly ruined my life, I thought the world should know."
Say Anything - Every Man Has A Molly

I'd just like to know who exactly defines "balance" and to what level it is afforded on ANY game?

I think Halo 2 is plenty blanaced... The rockets instant-kill... Sniper rounds instant-kill... a sword made of plasma hitting you in the face is an instant-kill...

It all seems balanced to me. Pistols suck... Rifles are good... Sub Machine Guns work the way their real-world counterparts would....

Before you people start complaining about "balance", I think you should first define WHAT balance is.

  • 06.14.2006 4:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I don't care who playtests it, as long as they're average gamers. Not some guy who can barely spell Halo, neither some oher guy who's never stepped foot away from his 360, but someone inbetween.

See, I don't care what the upper 1 percentile think about how Halo should be balanced. I also don't care how the lower 1 percentile think it should be balanced either. I want it to be balanced for the masses, and by the masses.

What I mean by that is that I don't want someone who can go through game after game and score >30 kills with <10 deaths, nor some team-killing tard with a score of -3. The average player should be the one to balance the game.

  • 06.14.2006 4:13 PM PDT

Official Town Drunk of Sandwichia. Nation of the Flood.
MBT - Impossible Just Happened
* How is it that "Fat Chance" and "Slim Chance" mean the same thing?
* If you choke a Smurf, what color will it turn?

XBOX User Space profile

Posted by: Achronos
You do realize that that playlist (6v6) went away because you guys didn't play it all that much, right? And that this same community didn't want 6v6 originally (which we were going to use to replace BTB). And now you're saying that you actually wanted 6v6 even though everybody wanted to BTB instead and nobody played 6v6 online...

Both sides can't be true. This is also the same story with Rumble Hardcore. We resisted it because we knew people wouldn't play it, but "The Internet" said otherwise, so we made it (with this community's help), and it is the least played playlist.

Seems like both are proving my point that "The Internet" is not the best source of information unless properly used (an example of it working well would be the Team Hardcore playlist, which seems to be doing well).

Posted by: Caer Bannog
This is a great idea, especially if Bungie refuses to see the effectiveness of games like 6v6 as opposed to BTB.


"The Internet" has it's ups and downs.

Many people did do those things, but then again, it was the same "Internet" that wanted Team SWAT as a playlist. and look whats happened to that. It's rivaling team slayer.

  • 06.14.2006 4:17 PM PDT

Posted by: Redoubt
I don't care who playtests it, as long as they're average gamers. Not some guy who can barely spell Halo, neither some oher guy who's never stepped foot away from his 360, but someone inbetween.

See, I don't care what the upper 1 percentile think about how Halo should be balanced. I also don't care how the lower 1 percentile think it should be balanced either. I want it to be balanced for the masses, and by the masses.

What I mean by that is that I don't want someone who can go through game after game and score >30 kills with <10 deaths, nor some team-killing tard with a score of -3. The average player should be the one to balance the game.


This would work, except for one small flaw. The upper 1% are the ones who actually know how to balance the game and make it fun. I dont want some kid who doesnt have intimate knowledge of how the game works trying to balance it. However, just because its a balanced game DOES NOT MEAN ITS NOT FUN.

[Edited on 6/14/2006]

  • 06.14.2006 4:37 PM PDT

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME GROUP INVITATIONS

The Halo REACH Script (post thoughts in thread)

Writing Lead of Whisper Studios. Check out Heron!

Look... I'm on bungiepedia!

Posted by: Achronos
Posted by: darkhart
2 things. 1) you are the "manager" so you are supposed to calm and polite and 2) 'The customer is always right'


I am always calm - I actually don't get angry hardly ever. I am not always polite, because sometimes that doesn't get the point across. And the customer isn't always right - others may behave that way but I hold you guys in higher regard than that. Unfortunately, being honest often means that you can't be nice to everyone. Anyway, good points on the rest of your post, darkhart.

=O Double negative!

--Rest of Post deleted for repetition--

[Edited on 6/14/2006]

  • 06.14.2006 7:32 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Sparky1111
Posted by: Caer Bannog
Posted by: Crankiest weasel
Probably the mothers of young children who play soccer.

Wiltron > Pros


I nominate Cranky for the role of playtesting.

I would also like to add that Super Smash Brothers was probably the game that was the most enjoyable to play yet had no "skill" or "pro" factor.

Posted by: PREDAT0R
It would be very wise for Bungie to hire at least a few professional Halo/Halo2 gamers with no bias towards the average gamer population to help with balance.


They better do it quickly before school begins again.

Are you serious? SSB has no skill? You must be playing the wrong people. SSB is the only multiplayer game I enjoy more than Halo, because it requires more skill than Halo in certain areas, such as reaction time, knowledge of the game, and having accurate reflexes. If SSB had no skill, MLG wouldn't host tournaments in it.

Dummy.
I second that. Super Smash does have a lot more skill than most other games. There are quite a few combos you can pull off, but only if you are quick with your fingers. I love SSBM. :)

  • 06.14.2006 9:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Foahda
The autoaim wasn't sky high in Halo 2. Go play Star Wars Battlefrotna dnt hen tell me Halo 2's auto-aim is sky high.
There is an option to remove auto-aim in Battlefront, genius.

  • 06.14.2006 9:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

not you ofcourse

  • 06.14.2006 11:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: DuHastDeutsch
Ich habe Informationen über Halo 3 ausgelaufen, haben Vorlagencheif und das arbitor Geschlecht- und Gebengeburt zu einem hitler Kind, das all tötet und dann alle Juden in der Welt tötet!


Tere ditah gadhe da saaleya, bhen nu teri nu, terii!!!! Blam! Blam! Blam!! -blam!-!!!

*assumes composure again*
People, why is it that this post has a 7th Column symbol in from of it in the forum listing?

[Edited on 6/15/2006]

  • 06.15.2006 1:56 AM PDT

Go to your room!


...Well I'm glad that worked, because those would have been terrible last words.

Achronos,

Does the shift from Halo 2 vista to a dedicated server system indicate Bungie showing a desire to alter the make-up of their network code for Halo 3?

What I'm getting at is, without specifics, can you tell us whether the netcding changes will be major or minor?

  • 06.15.2006 2:53 AM PDT

Posted by: TheBigShow
Thank God. A forum poster who can read and comprehend! Why do people think that if the game is balanced and skillfull (Halo CE) that it will automatically not be fun for the common gamer to play? Wheres the logic behind that?

Probably just because many of the people who call for balance and skill are such wankers, unfortunately.

  • 06.15.2006 4:20 AM PDT

Posted by: Redoubt
I don't care who playtests it, as long as they're average gamers. Not some guy who can barely spell Halo, neither some oher guy who's never stepped foot away from his 360, but someone inbetween.


I think that is shortsighted, and I think it would be much better if you included all those groups and not just the middle band which you fit into.

  • 06.15.2006 4:22 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

My friend, you would not tell with ſuch high zeſt
To children ardent for ſome deſperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum eſt
Pro patria mori.

Some thoughts on Matchmaking and the alternatives.

I've been playing an awful lot of Battlefield 2: Modern Combat on the 360 recently. That game has dedicated servers, with a some servers using map rotation and others using a voting system. Both are broken, in that they produce non-optimal results. The rotating servers are always empty because people don't like the possibility of getting a map they don't know inside out. The voting servers almost ALWAYS without fail play Backstab, Deadly Pass or A Bridge Too Far, because the largest minority can play them in their sleep in order to advance in ranks, and the remaining players are unorganised in their voting.

Just a consideration for those wanting to go down that route...

  • 06.15.2006 5:30 AM PDT

Death by figure skater.

I really have no problem with Matchmaking becuase you cure many problems with how you weight the games. Popular/Appropriate maps receive a higher weighting, but you still get a taste of everything. It works for me.

I too play the 360 BF2, and the voting thing is OK, but it still feels a bit off.

Back to topic:

It makes little sense to me to let the average gamer try to take on the difficult task of discovering balance issues in a game. Leave it to people that study the game, rather than those that just play it.

For example: I'd wager you could take the average gamer, throw him on Foundation Slayer 50 times in a row, and he'd be waiting for the BR to respawn all day, not knowing they do not respawn when held on that map. Or, he'd simply not think about the BR spawn issue whatsoever.

Sure, the average gamer can see the Banshee on Ascension in a Rifles game was inequitable, but little things will be missed. Little things missed can quickly ruin balance. It's a tough job, the balance testing, you really can't miss anything.

And I never get the feeling the average gamer on this board considers the impact of starting spawns. You can get a raw deal with the starting spawns, and I'm happy to hear they are working on perfecting the spawn system. It warms my heart.

Posted by: Sir Fragula
Some thoughts on Matchmaking and the alternatives.

I've been playing an awful lot of Battlefield 2: Modern Combat on the 360 recently. That game has dedicated servers, with a some servers using map rotation and others using a voting system. Both are broken, in that they produce non-optimal results. The rotating servers are always empty because people don't like the possibility of getting a map they don't know inside out. The voting servers almost ALWAYS without fail play Backstab, Deadly Pass or A Bridge Too Far, because the largest minority can play them in their sleep in order to advance in ranks, and the remaining players are unorganised in their voting.

Just a consideration for those wanting to go down that route...

  • 06.15.2006 6:20 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: atomic weggie
Posted by: Wiltron
We are their cash cow.


Who are you calling a cow?

The casual gamer is Halo's biggest demographic, not the people who pour over spawn points and map balance ratios.

No map is ever perfect, and that's the way I like it. Because I play for fun. If someone get's to the sniper or rocket before me cause they spawned closer, who cares?


Granted the "casual" gamer is what Bungie may be targeting with Halo 3. It's certainly not unjust to say that the demograpic of the casual gamer was their main (if not only) aim with Halo 2. However I think you're simplifying the whole argument for a more balanced and "Pro" approach.

What has been evident to me in the past 18 months of playing Halo 1,2 and visiting these forums (among others) is that some people still don't get it. What can be offered by investing more time and resources into a more "balanced" game play is something only a few seem to understand.

These benefits are for much more then say as organisation like MLG. What can be gained by a more balanced approach to game play is a longer lasting appeal to a stale and otherwise boring game.

Consider the problem of Halo 2 upon a wide group of players. No matter what their skill level. What has been evident in the past 12 months has been the growing legion of fans that have become bored with a game that lost it's appeal. The beauty of Halo 1 was that it was true to it's title. It evolved. Becoming a game that all players could find a way to play and enjoy no matter what their skill level.

The reasons for this were much greater then "balance" alone but even so the key to much of it's success was simply that at the HIGHER level of play the game came down to skill and simply not chance.

Consider also that from the very onset Halo 1 grew in popularity while Halo 2 from first release only fell. All be it not drastically (due to lack of competition IMO). It's easy for those that have an intimate knowledge and understanding of both games to understand why.

First day sales were staggering for Halo 2. Something like 2.6 millon units. Within 2 months it had sold about 6 millon. In hindsight I think Bungie should be very disappointed that it added only a another million or so copies in the proceeding 18 months. When it's name was traded away all that was left was a sub par FPS.

  • 06.15.2006 6:27 AM PDT
  • gamertag: DR0CX
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Ric_Adbur
No one should ever be afraid of looking stupid, so long as they are making a rational effort to expand their understanding.

Posted by: BLASTem
People, why is it that this post has a 7th Column symbol in from of it in the forum listing?

The Golden 7th Column symbol represent's Achronos's footprint. It shows on each thread he posts in.

  • 06.15.2006 6:37 AM PDT

Go to your room!


...Well I'm glad that worked, because those would have been terrible last words.

Posted by: Sir Fragula
Some thoughts on Matchmaking and the alternatives.

I've been playing an awful lot of Battlefield 2: Modern Combat on the 360 recently. That game has dedicated servers, with a some servers using map rotation and others using a voting system. Both are broken, in that they produce non-optimal results. The rotating servers are always empty because people don't like the possibility of getting a map they don't know inside out. The voting servers almost ALWAYS without fail play Backstab, Deadly Pass or A Bridge Too Far, because the largest minority can play them in their sleep in order to advance in ranks, and the remaining players are unorganised in their voting.

Just a consideration for those wanting to go down that route...


I agree with you entirely, I think that having a server list of available games creates all sorts of problems that are unnecessary. However, what I was wondering whether the hosting system would perhaps be altered, including dedicated servers, international and continental, or perhaps a ping filter to optimize the matches you're put into.

  • 06.15.2006 6:47 AM PDT

May you be in heaven long before the devil knows you're dead.

And I'll have to disagree with that. Have you ever seen the pros play?? They are quite clearly not having fun, but I do agree that they need some input. It should definitely be a mixed playtest, as should any game. Because everyone's different and likes different things. No I don't think the average gamer would have as much fun if the pros got there way completely but, neither should the average gamer. But, I imagine they have alot of input already from Halo 2 and have alot of the balance issues worked out or done the way they want.Posted by: TheBigShow
Posted by: Redoubt
I don't care who playtests it, as long as they're average gamers. Not some guy who can barely spell Halo, neither some oher guy who's never stepped foot away from his 360, but someone inbetween.

See, I don't care what the upper 1 percentile think about how Halo should be balanced. I also don't care how the lower 1 percentile think it should be balanced either. I want it to be balanced for the masses, and by the masses.

What I mean by that is that I don't want someone who can go through game after game and score >30 kills with <10 deaths, nor some team-killing tard with a score of -3. The average player should be the one to balance the game.


This would work, except for one small flaw. The upper 1% are the ones who actually know how to balance the game and make it fun. I dont want some kid who doesnt have intimate knowledge of how the game works trying to balance it. However, just because its a balanced game DOES NOT MEAN ITS NOT FUN.


[Edited on 6/15/2006]

  • 06.15.2006 6:54 AM PDT

It's fun when we win and funny when we lose: Le Mediocrity
OR
Come take your verbal beating like a man in THE CAVE

Posted by: PREDAT0R
Posted by: Wiltron
I believe the preferences of professional gamers matter LESS than the preferences of the "average" gamers. We (the average gamer) are their core audience. The professionals are a small, but vocal, minority. We are their cash cow. It would be a disaster if they made the game balanced, but inaccessible to the average Joe.

FUN>BALANCE


FUN + BALANCE = AWESOMNESS


Meh. Maybe. Maybe not. It depends on your definition of BALANCE. And you can't always marry the two effectively. I also believe that unbalanced gameplay can be a great deal of fun. Ever play random weapons? Probably. Ever take the rocket guy out with a few needles and a beatdown? Probably. It doesn't get much better than that.

On the other hand, BR battles in the middle of coagulation are quite the test of skill and since you both have the same weapon and no cover, I guess you can call it balanced. But fun? Only for a while. Eventually I'd go find a sniper, rockets, or a TANK! and go have some unbalanced fun.

The bottom line for me is that the guys at Bungie, the guys who have produced the two absolute BEST Xbox FPS games, are slaving away at creating a new game on ridiculously powerful hardware. They have the experience, the data, and the research on their side. Like it or not, they know what we want better than you, me, or any "pros" out there. Sit back, relax, and have confidence that they will take everything into account when creating their Magnum Opus that is H3.

There will be complaints when all is said and done ... but there's nothing they can do about that. You know the deal: You can't please everyone.

  • 06.15.2006 6:58 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

My biggest hope with halo 3 multiplayer is that bungie institutes a automated banhammer for modified content from the start. This needs to be done because some people are to damned smart. Hopefully multiplayer will be alot more balanced. They have learned from past events.

  • 06.15.2006 7:03 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Niall8r
Achronos,

Does the shift from Halo 2 vista to a dedicated server system indicate Bungie showing a desire to alter the make-up of their network code for Halo 3?

What I'm getting at is, without specifics, can you tell us whether the netcding changes will be major or minor?


I doubt this is the case for a console game- typically, PC games have dedicated servers to run them, so in keeping with that standard, it seems Bungie is doing the same. While I would love some dedicated servers to host MM games, I'm just not sure of how that would work- plus, it would be monstrously expensive for Bungie, given how many people play Halo 2. You would need a Mountain Dew logo on the BR, or a can of Pepsi to refuel your shield.

  • 06.15.2006 7:11 AM PDT

It's fun when we win and funny when we lose: Le Mediocrity
OR
Come take your verbal beating like a man in THE CAVE

Posted by: VVV
...Granted the "casual" gamer is what Bungie may be targeting with Halo 3. It's certainly not unjust to say that the demograpic of the casual gamer was their main (if not only) aim with Halo 2. However I think you're simplifying the whole argument for a more balanced and "Pro" approach.

What has been evident to me in the past 18 months of playing Halo 1,2 and visiting these forums (among others) is that some people still don't get it. What can be offered by investing more time and resources into a more "balanced" game play is something only a few seem to understand.

These benefits are for much more then say as organisation like MLG. What can be gained by a more balanced approach to game play is a longer lasting appeal to a stale and otherwise boring game.

Consider the problem of Halo 2 upon a wide group of players. No matter what their skill level. What has been evident in the past 12 months has been the growing legion of fans that have become bored with a game that lost it's appeal. The beauty of Halo 1 was that it was true to it's title. It evolved. Becoming a game that all players could find a way to play and enjoy no matter what their skill level.

The reasons for this were much greater then "balance" alone but even so the key to much of it's success was simply that at the HIGHER level of play the game came down to skill and simply not chance.

Consider also that from the very onset Halo 1 grew in popularity while Halo 2 from first release only fell. All be it not drastically (due to lack of competition IMO). It's easy for those that have an intimate knowledge and understanding of both games to understand why.

First day sales were staggering for Halo 2. Something like 2.6 millon units. Within 2 months it had sold about 6 millon. In hindsight I think Bungie should be very disappointed that it added only a another million or so copies in the proceeding 18 months. When it's name was traded away all that was left was a sub par FPS.


I disagree with almost everything you stated here. And those things that are factual (like # of copies sold on what day) don't matter. What I think is your main point (If it's more balanced, it will stay fresh longer) isn't necessarily true.

For those that see H3 as a test of their gaming prowess, maybe. For the rest of us who enjoy the missionary position (default or MLG settings) but also like to mix it up with Doggiestyle and Reverse Cowgirl (Random weapons, Pink Eye, Poo Poo King) ... not so much.

  • 06.15.2006 7:13 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Tai MT
I'd just like to know who exactly defines "balance" and to what level it is afforded on ANY game?

I think Halo 2 is plenty blanaced... The rockets instant-kill... Sniper rounds instant-kill... a sword made of plasma hitting you in the face is an instant-kill...

It all seems balanced to me. Pistols suck... Rifles are good... Sub Machine Guns work the way their real-world counterparts would....

Before you people start complaining about "balance", I think you should first define WHAT balance is.


When people are screaming about balance they're complaining that the game has a RPS feel to it. Like you said/implied Sniper will kill a Rifle. Rifle will kill a SMG. SMG will kill a pistol. These "Pro"/pro balance people feel that regardless of your gun you should be able to kill anyone in the game (Sniper = Rifle = SMG = Pistol).


and for the most part they also feel that if you lose a fight for a better weapon that you should be rewarded by having the chance to get it again in a few minutes (weapon respawn)

[Edited on 6/15/2006]

  • 06.15.2006 7:22 AM PDT