-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo |OT6| I will not allow you to leave this thread!
- Thread starter The Librarian
- Start date
- Status
Zealot space.
I mean, as tools have become so much more specialized to make game geometry, the people actually making the maps aren't game designers. But the game designers could probably grey-box out their map and play on it before they make it all pretty.
That's what they should do, but it certainly seems like they didn't in Reach for the most part.
I don't know if I'd say NO map designers know how competitive games are played though...
Barrow Roll
Member
Is it not possible to just have Hemo not show up as a voting option for people playing off of the Anniversary disc? Like how DLC doesn't show up for people without it?
Nope. It's a limitation of whatever they did with the Anniversary disc, according to them.
It's part of the reason why I'm confused the Reach side of the Anni disc happened. Anniversary can't load Noble or Defiant either, so Anni certainly isn't upselling people to the DLC packs, because they can't even load them.
And another reason why Reach would have been better off with the AnniPack being only a code with Anniversary, and not playable via the disc.
ElzarTheBam
Member
Damn your singing.
Although the party fight by those two individuals was the highlight.
The Henery
Member
There hasn't been a proper MM update for months and months. Sorry, adding heavies to BTB and forgeworld maps to Invasion (lol) doesn't count. To me, Reach hasn't been the same since they removed Squad Slayer and Anniversary Squad. No decent TU Slayer playlist with a reasonable population is left. Next weeks bulletin was supposed to detail the MM August update but BS angel hints that there might not be an update at all. This after last months no-show.....
As it stands, Reach is in a terrible condition. I've almost stopped playing it altogether. I'll probably stick to Halo 3 GAF customs until Halo 4. Reach needs freshening up badly. A few simple Forge tweaks to MM maps would work wonders. Remove the Sword and Shotgun from Countdown and replace them with a Grenade Launcher and Sniper, change the position of Rockets on Powerhouse... anything really. There's been fuck all changes to the maps since launch, time for a refresh.
That's the problem with games and internal testing. Designers don't typically play maps in the same way that hardcore/competitive or even casual players play. It would be hard to design a map like Narrows and then playtest it yourself. This isn't a bad or negative thing, it's just a fact of life.
For example, as a designer you I would bet never imagined someone could actually jump up the outside of the bridge from next to man cannon and make it all the way to top mid on Narrows. Or realize on some maps that you can juggle/throw a flag to a teammate for a quick score. Etc. etc. etc.
In all maps there will be grief spots and overlooked overpowered issues that are found by the community, put on youtube, and abused to no end. The only way to combat these issues is with frequent updates to maps and/or gametypes allowed on maps and Title Updates that are applied universally to all playlists (so they actually update the title...). We saw a lot of this in Halo 3. Most maps were on version 7 or higher at the end of the 3 year cycle. Weapons were moved, equipment was removed completely, spawns were changed, boxes added, etc. It's the only way to "fix" what you couldn't see at launch.
Well, I enjoy that type of play. The fight to the base, grabbing the flag, esacping with it, and scoring. Also, I like defending the base. To me its a great arena for that. I remember when there were two shotguns in each base plus a sniper on each side. You think it's rough now. Try that with a three shot pistol that could counter a sniper any day, plus a warthog that didn't respawn and if you lost it meant a huge disadvantage to you.
So yeah that sounds fun to me. Can I have it in objective now? Or does everyone want to camp corners and watch gaydar?
Designers do things in this order: Design, implement, test, iterate. The italicized part is not a burden shouldered solely by designers, and the test bed is a vast swathe of different types of player that range from people who have never played a stick-FPS to high level MLG types.
The VAST majority of test scenarios are performed by testers or test-bed audiences. So while it is a fact of life, the amount and range of data that is being input vastly exceeds the scope or "tastes" of a single designer.
Deadly Cyclone
Pride of Iowa State
Frank, when's the Reach playlist shuffling happening? Angel's update didn't seem to note it at all...
People discovered the awfulness that is Sword Base green vent on the first day of the beta.
It's such an obvious mistake that I can't help but feel that map was barely playtested at all.
Little to no hyperbole... from BF3, to MW, to Blops, to Crysis 2, to Reach... many, to most, depending on the game in question, simply are designed in such a way that it makes me wonder if the designers have any real understanding of how players will actually play what they have built. The easy one to pick on is say Reach... with Zealot and it's original design with the low gravity area and only three ways up, each of which has an entirely predictable exit. This particular design is a horse that's been beaten to death.
But just as easily I could talk about MW3 and the maps on which Domination are played where one side always has an immediate advantage, or Blops where there were certain maps that funneled game play to a point that the game was over once position was taken.
Increasingly in modern shooters, map design is over complicated. Not to be all kylej, but seriously - in every single modern shooter there are maps where it is immediately obvious to certain players just how something will be abused... to the point of wondering what the designer could have possibly been thinking... and when I say there are maps... it's not like they are exceptions to a rule... it's pretty common.
The shooter genre is full of beautiful maps, with awesome aesthetics, that do not foster good game play for a variety of reasons: game type played, spawn system, actual structure of map, game mechanics available to the player, and more.
It's one area of overall game design that I think has taken a step backward through the years, and it's not just in one franchise.
That's awesome... now in your home kitchen... explain the design of Zealot to me with the low gravity area outside and three lifts leading to it. With that VAST group of testing scenarios... you're telling me ultimately it was decided there was no problem? Or is it a perspective problem and testers didn't have an issue with people gaining a lead and immediately lifting and camping outside?
I definitely understand that. And I in no way mean to diminish or belittle the amount of work and testing that you all do. I'm simply pointing out that it's a fallacy to think that internal testing in any field is capable of catching all of the bugs and issues in a design. This is true across all games (ergo patches, title updates, etc. exist in almost all games). Some things are simple oversight/mistakes; some inherently are born out of the fact that those testers (as vast and varied a number as it might be) simply didn't play the game in a way that allowed them to discover it. For instance look at wall/rock hacks in MW2 or riding the mav like an elevator in BF3.
None of these issues is the fault of shoddy design or poor testing; it's just an inherent issue that plagues all design. I work in the architectural field and I can safely say every single project that we bid, after thousands of hours of work and expertise, usually has minor changes or faults that are found out in the field during construction. We correct them, move on, and file the fix mentally for our next design project.
Classy.
I guess these MLG types didn't test Zealot or Bungie just completely ignored their feedback. Everyone and their dog's toys could see that the space area wouldn't work the day the game got released.
And then there's the Shotgun and Sword abuse on Countdown. Did they really not see how that would be abused?
And please don't get me wrong... my above commentary is not belittling the work that goes into making the product... I just don't understand how there is a testing environment which you describe, and yet consistently there are designs released that commonly have issues immediately apparent... and not simple issues mind... game breaking issues...
And this is not limited to Halo.
Demoncarnotaur
Member
So, this weeks Bulletin was kinda meh.. Ah well. On another note, the Halo 4 Mcfarlane figures are starting to show up in stores for those interested.. It will probably take forever for them to hit here in Pittsburgh, but financially I have had to stop collecting em, for the time being anyways.
That kinda sucks Halo 4's is going to be so condensed.. I wonder why they didn't go the 2-disc deluxe route.
=(
Sorry to hear that..
Why can't we get a true single player trailer..or at least an extended cut of that one?
That kinda sucks Halo 4's is going to be so condensed.. I wonder why they didn't go the 2-disc deluxe route.
=(
Sorry to hear that..
Why can't we get a true single player trailer..or at least an extended cut of that one?
Portugeezer
Gold Member
So basically: we should expect a patch a week after launch.
Woulda made the soundtrack 60$.
Honestly, it's because it's not a perfect science. And to be fair, sometimes designer instincts need to vault over test resistance. Nobody would like a game designed solely via test feedback. I don't think anyone here thinks that would end well.
The Librarian
Banned
Aha.
YourExWife
Member
This is an outdated way of playing competitive Halo that in the current environment only hurts your team and annoys me to no end in matchmaking. Essentially, if you/your team are competent, you are agressive and need to do your best to make sure the other team stays dead/pushed back. By sitting back and "defending the base", in most cases all you do is ensure there is 1 less person that the other team has to worry about. The only gametype that this is ever really debateable for is 2-bomb, since sneaky-arms are *possible* (and round-based stupidity of course).
Ever since H3, full on setups have increasingly taken a backseat to organized-offensive pushes and holds.
StalkerUKCG
Banned
Sounds like we need more flame to purge the juniors.
Actually, for a AAA title, we probably should expect a patch within a week of launch. Obviously not a full title update; but a LOT of minor changes can be put into maps, weapon layouts, spawns etc., within that first week (or even month) that would go a long way toward restoring balance or grief issues.
Things like the Zealot 2 Flag CTF spawn trap should not happen...
We're just hoping (and from all talk so far it appears it will be true) that 343 takes a much more proactive approach to post launch gametype and map management than Bungie did with Reach.
The Henery
Member
They still don't apparently.
Especially seeing as there is no Beta to weed things out that wouldn't otherwise be readily apparent.
I will lead the hunt.
Demoncarnotaur
Member
I certainly didn't pay that much for the Halo 3 OST.. But I do agree pricing was a factor.
With the 'Nextbox' right around the corner I wouldn't do it.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
Leading the charge against your own kind? Disgraceful
IMO it's because they are making games for 4 million people, spending big sums of money per map. Everything polished, no hard edges that might piss off a reviewer. Everything beautiful.
Older games churned out more maps at less cost, in less time, seeking only to please a small group. You got a lot of dreck but you got amazing gems, too. My (dim) recollection is that most of the UT maps were kinda meh, but it had Deck 16 and Facing Worlds, too. Can you imagine if a game launched like that today? "Aside from a few exceptions, the maps are dreary, uninspired, and unbalanced."
The system today produces things that are inoffensive. It excels at that.
Sustain and maintainance are absolutely a hugely important part of our plans for Halo 4. I realize that may not map to some folks' experience with Reach, but we have to put our resources and people in the right place for the long-term, and it will ultimately provide significant benefits. It will be a reset of sorts, with a different team and different philosophy.
We have six or so weeks until Halo 4 is (almost) done. It's all hands on deck, period.
GET EXCITE
So much Warhammer to play before it comes out! Oh and get married and stuff.
I completely wouldn't suggest game design based solely on test resistance... it wouldn't end well. Certainly there are times when I'd say the original design should stand regardless of test data, particularly if the design is intending to foster some new specific dynamic in a game... or in an area where there are such new things being developed that there is no way to get accurate testing without people living with the new toys for a time.
Yet there is that trend of style over substance in the versus environment for modern shooters, to the detriment of game play.
Anywho... I have about 40 minutes of work left... anyone up for some Halo soon?
I regret nothing.
Absolutely pumped to hear it. Excited to see how 343 handles everything with 4.
What's that I hear? A BTS within the first two weeks of August? I want plz.
The Librarian
Banned
Congrats.
I dunno, Valve games are pretty good.
Demoncarnotaur
Member
So, 6 weeks to fix the Jackals eyes?
Its a minor gripe, I know, and it all comes down to opinion, but I want it for continuity and style. Also, 6 weeks til its mostly done?!? Wow. Hype.
Not sure if it can be said yet but..
In past Halo titles we saw maybe 1-2 updates in it's lifetime, will Halo 4 follow suit with that or will it be like other big games now (CoD and GoW) with a few updates in the following months post launch? I know it's hard to say you guys are clearing out bugs at the moment, and ideally you would rather have minimal updates.
Vire
Member
6 Weeks aye? Are you guys ahead of schedule? On schedule? Or lot's of sleepless nights?
lybertyboy
Thinks the Evil Empire is just misunderstood.
Yes, no, yes, yes.
Zeouterlimits
Member
I believe you (in your outlining of the facts at least
), but it makes your whole thought process/philosophy/commitment with Reach just kind of ... questionable. Makes me wonder if not identifying the matchmaking team (for Reach anyway) was an intentional thing, seeing how that worked for Bungie. More likely just a resource/time thing, but still.Just odd to basically take charge of it but not be able to (arguably) devote enough resources to it. Which of it was protecting the Halo brand, but putting the studio's matchmaking reputation in a weird place etc.
It's a complicated situation, more that we know, one I'd love to investigate and figure out the different forces, motivations and actualities at work. Oh well.
#veryTiredRamblings
Something that was rolling around my head in Japan:
Say week 1 Spartan Ops is found (statistically at 343i) to be too easy, say for 4 players on Legendary, beating it in record time/breaking the intended challenge (and therefore, to a certain extent, the quality). How set is the pipeline for the rest of the season? i.e. by which episode/mission can they/ye realistically integrate a fix/change?
Vire
Member
:lol
Understood.
*Whips*, get back to work!
It'll all be worth it, just think of all the smiles on Halo GAF's face
This was honestly more information provided than in the Bulletin. :lol
- Status