I would love to see a Forerunner version of Guardian. Edit: Does placing more spawn points on maps make it more likely to safe spawn?
The new spawn system sounds pretty sweet if what this article says is true. And I'm so glad for no fall damage.
Glad to hear that fall damage is gone. Hopefully the temporary stop you get from falling in Reach is gone as well.
no fall damage is definitely preferred, but i'd still like it to be an option. yay better spawning. Reach spawning was a disaster on most of those forge world maps *thinks of the cage* *shudders* so, good. good good.
I'm sure the article is oversimplifying, but based solely on what it said I'm not actually excited for this new attitude. I think the 'more spawn points' answer is an oversimplification of the situation, and there's a reason that forgers don't just throw more spawn points down to fix issues. It reduces logical control over the spawn system as a whole, and I don't like the idea that a safe spawn should trump a fair spawn. I think a map should be designed to accomodate enough logical respawn locations which allow for both safe and fair spawns as much as is appropriate. Simply giving more respawns risks chucking respawning players in to an overly advantageous or illogical position just to avoid LoS or proximity, handing them a bonus for dying and messing with the potential for developed strategies by teams which are based on a reliable logic to systems like spawning. As I said, I can see this being an oversimplification, and one of those phrases which 343 are going to lament when people continue to fixate upon it until they clarify. Just like when the word "random" first popped up in relation to ordnance, which I notice it does here too, though with more clarification. I think articles like this tend to take points which they feel people will be able to understand and focus on them, the very tangible idea of "more spawn points" being a good example. I would hope that it's simply an aspect of what 343 are doing with a larger overhaul of the spawn system, and they've focused on the number of spawns in a slightly disproportionate way.
Guys, fall damage is more then likely still in. The linked article's source is a video of MLGBravo who mentioned that he didn't notice fall damage at E3. After he posted the video he found out that fall damage is indeed in the E3 build and he corrected himself.
the original guardian was forerunner... and yes, in theory. more possible safe places to spawn should make it more like to safe spawn.
I know what you're saying, but I read the entire article as it meaning "the new system allows for us to maximize safe spawns by putting more down" as opposed to them objectively stating that placing more spawn points is automatically a good idea. I would further venture to say "come on, surely they wouldn't design an atrocious spawn system, nor release details that would cause intelligent people to question its veracity as a viable system itself before the game premieres" but after the step down from Halo 3 to Reach in terms of spawning... I'm not so sure anymore. As for ordinance drops, they're exactly what I was thinking they were (including the context-sensitive options, like no Rockets on CQ maps), which just makes me hate it more. I thought there was going to be something more substantial I was missing that would make me relish their inclusion.
I really hope fall damage is included. I really liked feeling like a super soldier but I dont care how strong you are, a high enough fall will hurt or kill you.
^ Funny Spartans are super humans. I think they can take a bit of a drop if you're going by the canon. Regardless, fall damage = no-go for gameplay.
That orbital drop Noble 6 had was just ridiculous, nothing about that fall was to my liking. And I do understand what you all mean, and why you say it, but fall damage is just something that I like to have and makes me feel weird if it's not in the game. I would be fine if it took a harder fall to kill or harm, but there should be some point where it kills in my opinion.
yeah, once you go past the kill barrier. i cant think of any situation on any map within the boundaries of it where a fall should hurt a spartan, except maybe the spire.
That's not entirely clear to me. I think fall damage is arguably very good for gameplay, in at least a few ways that I can think of: one, being on severe high ground forces a risk vs. reward scenario to occur. The reward is the dominant position; the risk is the fall if you misstep or try to run. This was a critical part of the old CE map Damnation (now remade as Penance) - without fall damage, that sniper catwalk becomes an even more dominant position; with fall damage, being up there is a serious risk, because more than half the places you can fall to will hurt or kill you. Same was true of Prisoner (now Solitary) - almost the only thing that offset the power of the top level was that if you fell to the ground floor, you were doomed. Two, Halo is already a game that (thanks to AAs and sprint) has a lot more running away than it used to have. Giving players some disadvantage when they drop a tremendous height is a good way to discourage or limit their ability to just run away when under fire. And three, fall damage creates its own skill gaps - knowing where you can fall safely and where you can't is a skill; knowing how to crouch-land (assuming it's possible in H4) is also a skill. On the con side, fall damage limits movement and inhibits map flow in a particular way, but if the maps are designed for it (like the two examples I mentioned) then that can be fine. In the case of a map like Damnation, turning off fall damage actually hurts the map flow in my eyes - it's almost like having a jetpack that only works in a downward direction. Want to go from sniper catwalk to rockets with no risk to yourself? No problem, just walk off and do it. The map benefited from that fall being dangerous.