Halo 4 Gameplay Video Discussion

Longbow weapon balance doesn't look to good but that's easily fixed if the community complains about it too much Mainly that sniper was way too close to spawn.

 

6:57 in the video, I see spawning problems already. Dude gets the same spawn twice. When there's an enemy right in front of him.

 

I noticed that too, I am wondering if that is customizable. I would assume so--that would be a cool addition.

 

I really liked how the person body-shot another dude with a sniper and tried to clean up with a BR from long-range, but failed completely. So glad BR and DMR are both in this game with unique roles.

Edit 1: I really don't understand why the trees look like such **** on this map. It looks like they used only 4-6 planes to create them. I find them incredibly distracting on a map that looks beautiful otherwise.

Edit 2: Ghost looks bad-ass. I'm really digging those 5 lights in front of the driver-seat on the hull.

 

Halo 4 Longbow RTX Gameplay (3 Games) | Day 2 - YouTube

Found 3 more matches courtesy of Waypoint.

-Dat Warthog takes 2 stickies and walks away. So we go from vehicles being made of tissue paper to shrugging off explosives.

-How about a modified Halo 3 system?

-I like the shield recharge effect. Reminiscent of Halo 3.

-Surprised that 4v4 or 5v5 works on this BTB map...sorta.

-Map looked...eh. Is it me, or is there a big choke point somewhere near the middle that is seemingly unavoidable when crossing the map? It looks more like a TF2 map. Whatever. Can't tell for sure just from this.

-And I still despise AAs. Sprint included.

And on the team names, I remember reading somewhere that there are a set list of names to choose for the teams, similar to Loadout names in Reach. I don't have the source for that on me, but I believe it came from 343. I'm 90% sure.

 

On the map, you're probably right. I just noticed that one spot seemed to grab the camera most of the time.

And I think the vehicles are looking too tough. Obviously, this is a beta so that is subject to change. I still don't think that warrants the vehicle or its occupants surviving a direct rocket or two sticks, both of which happen in the video I linked in various points. I'd like a more Halo 3-style vehicle health, which I outlined in the main Halo 4 thread a few pages back, but this looks stronger than that. As of now.

And I wish I could say the same for excitement, but I'm still not terribly impressed. If they took away sprint, AAs, loadouts, made smaller maps (Haven is classified as small) and added in other new shiny stuff that didn't affect the 'same starts' mantra, I'd be drooling. Dat underlying gunplay visible mainly in the MLG vids looked really neat, but clouded by unnecessary and gimmicky abilities. As is, I can still hardly believe Halo is getting custom classes and unlockable weapons. And a good AR. Only in dreams.

Not to say that they have to do that, but as a consumer and fan that's my asking price.

 

Graphically, my only criticisms are that:
1: the glacial walls wrapping the entire map look kinda low-res and 2D
2: the trees look a bit weird without snow or anything affecting them
3: the bullets coming out of both mounted turrets and warthog turrets look like you're firing beefy yellow hotdogs out of your gun.

Other than that, everything looks excellent.


I don't mind the tough warthog because it looks like the players are still incredibly vulnerable. My only concern is that destroying vehicles in terms of sabotaging an enemy team might take more firepower; what if they made it so that vehicles take slightly more damage when unmanned?

The AR looks a bit too good. I don't mind the gun being pretty useful, but even at close range, I think that the BR, DMR, and Pistol (the guns that take a lot more skill and precision to use) should beat it by just a sliver at the very least when used perfectly. I can't really tell from the video too well, but it seemed like its kill time was buffed dramatically to match that of a BR being perfectly used.

 

the AR should be better than the precision weapons at close range. if not, whats the point? from the videos, it looks like its effectiveness is drastically less at mid range, and nonexistent at mid-long range. which is what it should be.
i think the halo 3 BR was slightly better than the AR even at the AR's most effective range, and that was not good. the BR was the best weapon choice almost 100% of the time (save for power weapons of course) and that made the game sort of boring and monotonous sometimes.

 

The fact that it has such a small skill gap and is so easy to use is a pretty good reason for it being lesser than the guns that do take skill.

 

no, thats a terrible reason. it cant be inferior in every single situation, or there is literally no point in them including it in the game.

the needler is automatic, and it even has tracking projectiles. its easier to use then a BR, so it should never beat a BR. might as well just take it out of the game. while we're at it, most power weapons are easier to get a kill with than a BR, lets nerf them until BR beats them everytime. well, now theres no point in even picking one up, so lets just take them out too, along with every other weapon in the sandbox. now we have a game where everyone uses a BR all game, every game. what great fun. and now there's no n00bs that can beat me with ARs or needlers shottys or rockets even though im getting perfect headshots all the time. i saw they were using that weapon, and i still didnt take the proper action to put myself in a position where the BR would easily win, but its still not my fault. id rather play where everyone has the same weapon, so i can rely on my reflexes rather than my situational awareness.

there's a pretty small window of where the AR is effective, and the skill lies in knowing when to use it.

 

There is a difference between spawning weapons and pickup or power weapons. Power weapons can be contested, and even weapons which wouldn't be contested are extremely limited in terms of usage when placed on the map. Even if you put three of that weapon on each side with a 30 second spawn time, it would be used considerably less often (if you've ever played non-BR/DMR slayer).

The needler is supposed to be useful when enemies are not close to cover, or their movement is limited in narrow geometry; if they are popping in and out of cover it is practically useless compared to a BR/DMR, with their instant-traveling bullets. Otherwise, you have to predict their movements. I'm not a fan of having needler-starts in invasion because they are better than the other (relatively) skill-requiring weapons. Granted, because needler spawns are not contested or even well-known, you may not be able to prepare for an enemy with a needler, but the advantage that they have is still so uncommon that it is not game-breaking.

If a perfectly-accurately fired AR (up close) could beat a BR in less than 4 bursts (I don't remember what the times were in H3, but this is hypothetical), a 5-burst BR kill would allow an opposing AR user to fire about 4/3 as many shots (counting the intervals between bursts), which would mean that the AR would be used about half the time on small-room maps like Guardian, Countdown, and Adrift- maps which were pretty popular (who knows about Adrift), if you consider how few players could count on 4-bursting enemies more than half the time.

In cases in which it is not used regularly, it just becomes a "poor man's shotgun" (I didn't come up with that) at spawn, where you have to crouch around corners to catch the enemy by surprise completely. This makes the game slower for everyone, whether you are crouching or hesitating at every corner. I like that there are a few weapons which work best if you do this, but I wouldn't want that to be the most likely successful tactic for everyone at spawn. The AR may kill slower than the shotgun at melee range, but just beyond sword lunge range it kills faster, so there is more room for distance-error when surprising an enemy. Every other player would have to switch to his AR when rounding a corner to match a croucher's firepower, which would be inconvenient when there are enemies at a distance from that corner. The only extra skill which players would need with a powerful AR at spawn is the ability to discern close quarters from medium and long ranges and switch weapons accordingly. This really isn't a "skill" at all; it just means that a player who happens to encounter enemies at both ranges within a short amount of time, or at the wrong range (whether an enemy rounds one of many corners or the player rounds a corner) is out of luck, because that weapon switching time would eliminate that player's chances of . Imagining the part of the map that surrounds you, or "situational awareness" (which includes, and is no less complicated than knowing the appropriately ranged weapon for the area) is a very basic skill that every player needs to play properly; it will not be lost just because players do not need to press the Y button and wait when moving around.

Of course, there are other problems with the making the AR a frequently viable alternative to the BR: its spread is random enough to make any battle a foot from its perfectly-precise range (this barely imprecise range is the range at which most non-cross-map Guardian and Countdown battles were fought) come down to chance, especially because aiming with the AR is relatively easy. The spread also rewards reticle inaccuracy almost as much as it rewards reticle accuracy. So far the AR's role was/is a set of training wheels for new players who couldn't aim at all with the BR/DMR. I wouldn't mind a superior AR-beatdown combo, but that was only considerably superior in H3 with melee bleedthrough. The AR user would win with just a bit of health left in that case, and the range of the encounter had to be closer than the shooting-to-death AR range. I wouldn't mind a plasma rifle or spiker as a starting weapon, because they have no random spread issues and require "leading shots", a fairly unique aiming skill (besides nades, rockets, H3 BR, wraith). Perhaps the spiker's clip and the PR's overheat could be made to match that of the AR's < 2 kill clip.

 

If this were still halo 3, where everyone starts with AR and BR is a pickup, then that logic is perfect. but with loadouts in the game, meaning you have the option of starting with either AR or one of the precision rifles, there is literally no point in even including the AR in the game if it does not beat the BR, DMR, and CC at some sweet spot range. mid range, precision rifle wins. longer range, obviously precision rifle wins. melee range, precision rifle should win. but there has to be some sweet spot close-ish range where the AR wins, or why even have it as a starting weapon?

 

Like I said, to give novice players something easier to aim with (I also said that I wouldn't mind the AR winning melee fights. If it didn't win melee fights it couldn't win any close range fight, because the melee eliminates the headshot advantage of precision weapons. That's a good point about loadouts though- and how are they going to have balanced, distinct (similar, but not completely redundant) secondaries? The storm rifle does not appear to be different in any way from the AR (from what they have showed us), even though the multiplayer spokesman (maybe he was the MP lead designer, I forget) said that it was going to serve a unique role in the sandbox. It's not a problem at all; I suppose that the "secondary" classification exists only because it would be a problem if there wasn't a "primary" classification, which prevents carrying two primaries without a perk.