Halo | Just Dustin Echoes

By db Go To PostThere's not liking it and there's actively not playing it. Do I need to cite Halo 4 population numbers?

Not actively playing a game =/= to abandoning the franchise.

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostNot actively playing a game =/= to abandoning the franchise.

I don't even know what this means.

Halo 4 was such a shit show that people flocked back to Reach.

This isn't me being bitter in the least, it's the reality of what went down. In sheer numbers. That says a lot to me about the direction the game took and just how many people got soured on it.

By db Go To PostI don't even know what this means.

Halo 4 was such a shit show that people flocked back to Reach.

This isn't me being bitter in the least, it's the reality of what went down. In sheer numbers. That says a lot to me about the direction the game took and just how many people got soured on it.

Do you not know what "=/=" means, or are we just not on the same page?

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostDo you not know what "=/=" means, or are we just not on the same page?

What are you saying though? For all intents and purposes players had abandoned the series. If they return that means that came back.

If they hadn't abandoned it then you would've seen the numbers go somewhere else like Halo 3 or Reach. But no, they dropped off a fuckin cliff like the Wiley Coyote.

I took a break in h4 because at launch it was... Not amazing.

Came back for the turbo update and played till MCC tho

By -Ryn Go To PostWhat are you saying though? For all intents and purposes players had abandoned the series. If they return that means that came back.

If they hadn't abandoned it then you would've seen the numbers go somewhere else like Halo 3 or Reach. But no, they dropped off a fuckin cliff like the Wiley Coyote.

Some did go to Reach for a while, then just said fuck it entirely lol.

By -Ryn Go To PostWhat are you saying though? For all intents and purposes players had abandoned the series. If they return that means that came back.

If they hadn't abandoned it then you would've seen the numbers go somewhere else like Halo 3 or Reach. But no, they dropped off a fuckin cliff like the Wiley Coyote.

That's not entirely true.

The social need of people is to be at what's popular. The previous games are no longer popular, thus not many people will return to them. In all likelihood, they went to play Call of Duty or some other game that fufilled their multiplayer wants. Most gamers aren't exactly franchise loyal; they just play what's popular and fun.

It's the same reason behind why the disgruntled or upset competitive fans don't mod CE (or create a brand new game) to fulfill what the developer (Bungie or 343i) is not doing. It's because even if the game is exactly what they've wanted, it won't be popular. (Though I'd love to be proven wrong on that)

By db Go To PostSome did go to Reach for a while, then just said fuck it entirely lol.

lol I remember when Reach had an almost consistently higher population than Halo 4 for a while. Then when Halo 3 went free there was a huuuuuge return of players (old and new) for a bit. For just a short time, it felt like the good ol' days. Too bad they never made the DLC free. Probably would've helped a little.

By -Ryn Go To Postlol I remember when Reach had an almost consistently higher population than Halo 4 for a while

But the population of Halo 4 jumped shit for *reasons* other than it being a shitty Halo game. Some of the rationalizations in here, smh.

By db Go To PostBut the population of Halo 4 jumped shit for *reasons* other than it being a shitty Halo game. Some of the rationalizations in here, smh.

In here?

I have yet to see that happen unless I missed a page or two several dozen back.

By Ragnarok Flames Go To PostAlso you cannot be this fucking dense.

Sarcasm... How does it work? All you do is complain about Halo lol. Of course I know what franchise you're talking about. :p

By Ragnarok Flames Go To PostBut to see a franchise you love get relegated to "shit flung at a wall from other games that worked there, and shoveled into a heap" is disheartening

By db Go To PostHe's talking about Halo. There's no need to pretend it didn't turn to shit for some people once Reach hit and it was suddenly about a different kind of gameplay entirely.

By db Go To PostEh. I think it's pretty obvious Reach was when it started going in a really different direction. 4 was better in some respects but then took the whole loadout/aa/perk thing to new heights. People who just weren't into that finally gave up on it.

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostI don't deny Reach was a major filter, but so has every other Halo game.

It's really easy for me to put myself in the shoes of those who don't like each Halo sequel and understand exactly why they abandoned the franchise based on that entry.

By db Go To PostIf that's the case then maybe a reality check is needed when even Halo casuals were complaining that it's too CoD-like to maintain their prolonged interest.

I agree with Lord of Admirals. You say it's "pretty obvious Reach" was the game that drastically changed everything, but Halo 2 arguably changed just as much, if not more than Reach did. There were many core changes between CE and Halo 2 - just to name a few:

-You could be a powerful force as an individual player in CE because of strong the weapons were, especially the Pistol.
-Halo 2 required teams to teamshoot to be effective, meaning it was best to roll in pairs for quick kills as opposed to CE where it wasn't a requirement for high level play
-Halo 2's increased aim assist and hitscan drastically changed the way the gunplay felt
-Insane melee lunge
-Heavily nerfed grenade throws and grenade strength
-Halo 2's bullets, even shots from the Rocket, would curve towards enemies
-Drastically changing the way vehicles handled by changing the physics and making them destructible
-Physics in general, the biggest change took place from CE to H2
-Fundamental change to how Power-Ups and power weapon timing worked
-Moon boots
-The list goes on.

Halo Reach changes:

-Bloom
-Armor Abilities
-Sprint
-Nerfed jump height
-Buffed grenades considerably after Halo 3
-Made improvements to the melee lunge by decreasing it's length
-Removed Power-Ups until Camo returned with Anniversary

Can't recall much else, whereas I could have kept going with the changes between CE and Halo 2 lol. Truth be told, like Admirals said each Halo game aside from Halo 2 to Halo 3 in my opinion felt pretty different from its predecessor.

Also, let's not discount the massive boom in popularity this franchise saw from Halo 2 to Halo 3, so it's success within the competitive scene was inevitable since Halo was the hot shit back then. If Halo 3 were to release as it was in 2007 but as a new game today, it would be hated. Reach is perceived to be the start of Halo's downfall in part because of this, but that's partly because most of Halo's fanbase started investing a lot of time into its multiplayer post 2004-2007.

As for the population drop with Halo 4, the fanbase as a whole was fed up by then. CE diehards experienced 10 years of disappointments with Halo 2-Reach. Halo 2 diehards experienced 2-5 years of disappointments with Halo 3 and Reach. Halo 3 diehards experienced 2 years of disappointments with Reach. Then by the time Halo 4 came around in 2012, people were so disappointed collectively with the changes that they gave up and flocked to other games for their multiplayer fix. *And as a note, when I say diehard here I don't mean your ordinary fan, I'm talking about those who swear by that game as the best Halo game.

There's more to it than that, for sure, but one can't deny most Halo games feel pretty different between each other.

Really liked the diversity of weapons on display. SMG needs to be reworked, to dangerous at range. Pistol seemed to have a bit too much reach on it as well. Can't wait to get my hands on this.

I don't know how you could possibly play Halo and think CE/2/3 are more different than the games that implemented loadouts, AAs, and perks.

Just listing an amount of changes ignores the impact of specific changes.

Your idea of "more stuff changed" is not relevant to what I'm talking about.

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostIn here?

I have yet to see that happen unless I missed a page or two several dozen back.

I believe he is referring to your rationalization that the games poor population was due to players having a social need to play what's new and big as opposed to the game just ya know... being kinda shit. Sure it got some issues fixed later on but by that point players probably had either found something else to play or just didn't like Halo 4 enough to try going back to it. I personally played mostly Reach or 3 after a while. Didn't touch Halo 4 for looooooong stretches of time.

You're right that it isn't as simple as saying that the game sucked so people left. But you're crazy if you don't think it had a huge hand in it. Yeah there's a lot of competition in the market now but even Reach held a solid population for a while. Meanwhile Halo 4 was just dead within a couple months. That is not merely a matter of what's "hip".

By Invert Go To PostReally liked the diversity of weapons on display. SMG needs to be reworked, to dangerous at range. Pistol seemed to have a bit too much reach on it as well. Can't wait to get my hands on this.

I'm just happy to see every weapon be viable, especially something like the SMG which has always been a pea shooter. =P

By -Ryn Go To PostI believe he is referring to your rationalization that the games poor population was due to players having a social need to play what's new and big as opposed to the game just ya know… being kinda shit. Sure it got some issues fixed later on but by that point players probably had either found something else to play or just didn't like Halo 4 enough to try going back to it. I personally played mostly Reach or 3 after a while. Didn't touch Halo 4 for looooooong stretches of time.

You're right that it isn't as simple as saying that the game sucked so people left. But you're crazy if you don't think it had a huge hand in it. Yeah there's a lot of competition in the market now but even Reach held a solid population for a while. Meanwhile Halo 4 was just dead within a couple months. That is not merely a matter of what's "hip".

Except that's not what I said the cause of people leaving Halo 4 in the first place was... In fact, I didn't even label a cause once in any of my posts. The bolded part seems to have been taken out of context by both you and DB, as that was meant to explain why those who found Halo 4 less than satisfactory didn't resurge into the older Halo games. Though I'm not ruling out that friends leaving Halo 4 did cause some players to leave. I'd imagine that'd be a small number.

Of course, DB is right that they did resurge into Reach for a short while

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostI'm just happy to see every weapon be viable, especially something like the SMG which has always been a pea shooter. =P

SMG looked a bit too viable :P I'd actually be ok if they kinda swapped the SMG and AR roles. Make the SMG a starter weapon with reduced range, yet still dependable at close ranges. Maybe give a slight buff to the overall range of the AR and make it a map pickup. The SMG's accuracy + high RoF make it a bit too powerful in long distance engagements. (this is opinion)

I mean, its pretty telling that nearly everything that existed in H4 at launch besides loadouts has been removed.

No more random ordnance, no more personal ordnance, etc

The BR was 5 shot. The DMR was god-king, nothing else came close.

Launch H4 multi wasn't great. However, post turbo, I played quite a lot, because it was good, and we had legendary settings, and even if not that there was no more ordnance, and timed weapons on map again.


SMG in the tourney looked hella stronk, I mean... it is considered a power weapon now, right? Because if it isn't it should be.

Has a VoD of today's tournament been uploaded? I looked on the Halo Channel and came up empty. I saw bits and pieces on my phone at work but would love to watch beginning to end tonight.

By db Go To PostI don't know how you could possibly play Halo and think CE/2/3 are more different than the games that implemented loadouts, AAs, and perks.

Just listing an amount of changes ignores the impact of specific changes.

Your idea of "more stuff changed" is not relevant to what I'm talking about.

For many people, the impact of specific changes is an entirely subjective matter. I can see why he thinks CE/2/3 are radically different from one another. At the same time I also understand why you don't see that.

I do agree that many aspects of Halo 2 were radically different from Halo CE, many for the negative. However, I would argue that these negative changes were overlooked by the novelty and innovation that Max Hoberman brought to online multiplayer, creating a new age in gaming. Same goes for Halo 3. And while Halo Reach certainly improved upon everything Halo 3 introduced, it never brought anything brand spanking new to the table, and the innovative social features from Halo 3 stopped seeming so special for many (but not all), and the altered and randomized gameplay (a new introduction to Halo's repertoire) Reach featured took a much more prominent spotlight.

When I talk to friends and classmates about the Halo 2 - 3 era, most of them don't talk about the gameplay, they talk about how much fun it was to do X, Y, or Z with their friends.

This is why Destiny is still so popular despite having such shoddy game design. It dumbed down the social aspects of an MMO and made them accessible to gamers who hand't experienced them before. (That and because Bungie's nailed down a near flawless presentation of Destiny both in-game and marketing-wise.)

Well... I do seem to have gotten a bit off track.

SMG looked strong at close range, but there were plenty of times I saw it take a full clip to BARELY secure a kill at medium range with the enemy aware of the attack. Sometimes it came up short if the enemy was evading well enough.

Maybe it's a little too strong, but i feel like it looked close to where it should be.

By db Go To PostI don't know how you could possibly play Halo and think CE/2/3 are more different than the games that implemented loadouts, AAs, and perks.

Just listing an amount of changes ignores the impact of specific changes.

Your idea of "more stuff changed" is not relevant to what I'm talking about.

You were talking about Reach. Reach didn't have perks, and competitive Reach (as in MLG, AGL, etc.) didn't have loadouts, although matchmaking obviously did. The AA's were on the maps as pickups, and felt a lot better that way; it's how the game should have been.

By thornXBL Go To PostSMG looked strong at close range, but there were plenty of times I saw it take a full clip to BARELY secure a kill at medium range with the enemy aware of the attack. Sometimes it came up short if the enemy was evading well enough.

Maybe it's a little too strong, but i feel like it looked close to where it should be.

I guess my debating on it is kinda moot, since we don't have our hands on the game at the moment. It's hard to observe these things via the footage presented, and without actual testing available.

By link1201 Go To PostHas a VoD of today's tournament been uploaded? I looked on the Halo Channel and came up empty. I saw bits and pieces on my phone at work but would love to watch beginning to end tonight.

https://www.youtube.com/user/SuddothMediaHD/videos?&ab_channel=SuddothMediaHD

This YT channel has the tournament in its entirety split into parts. It's all in HD, too. The tournament wasn't in 60fps so that's why the videos aren't in 60fps.

db, if you can't see how a physics engine change from CE to Halo 2 would drastically change gameplay, then I don't know what else to say. Perhaps play more CE?

By derpface123 Go To Posthttps://www.youtube.com/user/SuddothMediaHD/videos?&ab_channel=SuddothMediaHD

This YT channel has the tournament in its entirety split into parts. It's all in HD, too. The tournament wasn't in 60fps so that's why the videos aren't in 60fps.

Awesome! Thank you.

By FUNKNOWN iXi Go To Postdb, if you can't see how a physics engine change from CE to Halo 2 would drastically change gameplay, then I don't know what else to say. Perhaps play more CE?

Not necessarily that. He just values different aspects of Halo's gameplay than you or I do. For him, an entire physics engine being changed is inconsequential as it's not necessarily tied to what he values most (correct me if I'm wrong DB) which is equal starts arena gameplay with a heavy focus and emphasis on precision weapon dueling.

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostExcept that's not what I said the cause of people leaving Halo 4 in the first place was… In fact, I didn't even label a cause once in any of my posts. The bolded part seems to have been taken out of context by both you and DB, as that was meant to explain why those who found Halo 4 less than satisfactory didn't resurge into the older Halo games. Though I'm not ruling out that friends leaving Halo 4 did cause some players to leave. I'd imagine that'd be a small number.

Of course, DB is right that they did resurge into Reach for a short while

It was in reference to this comment which was a response to DB using Halo 4 as an example of players abandoning ship.

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostThat's not entirely true.

The social need of people is to be at what's popular. The previous games are no longer popular, thus not many people will return to them. In all likelihood, they went to play Call of Duty or some other game that fufilled their multiplayer wants. Most gamers aren't exactly franchise loyal; they just play what's popular and fun.

It's the same reason behind why the disgruntled or upset competitive fans don't mod CE (or create a brand new game) to fulfill what the developer (Bungie or 343i) is not doing. It's because even if the game is exactly what they've wanted, it won't be popular. (Though I'd love to be proven wrong on that)

If I misunderstood your intent (which it would seem I did), then my apologies.

Imagine if someone just froze this OT until the week of October 27... We would all just go about our lives until there was actually a point to talking about Halo 5's mechanics and changes from previous titles, since we would have the game to determine just how significant those changes are. Also I imagine traffic would increase and there would be more positivity (unless the game is broken at launch, but... let's hope that doesn't happen).

Just a thought.

By -Ryn Go To PostIt was in reference to this comment which was a response to DB using Halo 4 as an example of players abandoning ship.


If I misunderstood your intent (which it would seem I did), then my apologies.

Right, but what I was attempting to convey was that just because all those people stopped playing Halo 4, doesn't mean they won't buy the next Halo if it makes the appropriate changes. For a phrase like "abandoning the franchise" I interpret that as being done with the series in its entirety. Meaning it's no longer in their... "vocabulary"... to buy a game from the franchise again.

Also, I appreciate the apology. =)

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostNot necessarily that. He just values different aspects of Halo's gameplay than you or I do. For him, an entire physics engine being changed is inconsequential as it's not necessarily tied to what he values most (correct me if I'm wrong DB) which is equal starts arena gameplay with a heavy focus and emphasis on precision weapon dueling.

I didn't know we were discussing opinions; we were comparing changes between games and how they impact core gameplay differences. Maybe I'm missing something..

By Lord of Admirals Go To PostNot necessarily that. He just values different aspects of Halo's gameplay than you or I do. For him, an entire physics engine being changed is inconsequential as it's not necessarily tied to what he values most (correct me if I'm wrong DB) which is equal starts arena gameplay with a heavy focus and emphasis on precision weapon dueling.

You are correct.

Used to physics engines changing since I was really into shooters on pc back in the day and that stuff was constantly updating from game to game.

By derpface123 Go To PostImagine if someone just froze this OT until the week of October 27… We would all just go about our lives until there was actually a point to talking about Halo 5's mechanics and changes from previous titles, since we would have the game to determine just how significant those changes are. Also I imagine traffic would increase and there would be more positivity (unless the game is broken at launch, but… let's hope that doesn't happen).

Just a thought.

This thread is obnoxiously positive about Guardians.

By FUNKNOWN iXi Go To PostI didn't know we were discussing opinions; we were comparing changes between games and how they impact core gameplay differences. Maybe I'm missing something..

For a topic such as this, it's pretty much inherently opinion related. While DB shouldn't deny (not to say he outright did) that gutting an entire physics engine and replacing it with a new one is going to lead to massive ramifications and heavily alter the way a game feels, it may not be something that affected anything of value in Halo for him.

The overall theme of this discussion (to my understanding [at least] =P) was what the tipping point of the franchise was for what lead us into low population/popularity Halo. My argument is that there's been a tipping point at each sequel in the main Halo game series where many people drew the line and said they were done. As well as that the varied populations of the Halo games is part in due to many, many variables, those of which I feel being the major components, are the social innovations in the Halo franchise.

I like Halo.

By Ragnarok Flames Go To PostThis thread is obnoxiously positive about Guardians.

It's also obnoxiously negative.

Guess we'll just have to learn to post along side one another, hmm?

Everything we've seen of Halo 5 has been promising so far. Whether it delivers or not, we won't know until Oct 27th, but until then... it looks great.

By YourExWife Go To PostCongrats on your 2nd place today. Not enough perfects on screen for my taste though.

Hah, my namesake has been replaced by a younger and much better player.

By db Go To PostIf that's the case then maybe a reality check is needed when even Halo casuals were complaining that it's too CoD-like to maintain their prolonged interest.

Reality Check you say??

.

It's 'obnoxiously positive' or negative because people have different Halos in their head, and, of course, some people are naturally more positive and optimistic/cynical and pessimistic than others, for good and ill.

The tourny did show that autos are much more viable now, but if I think back to Beta, I remember plenty of BR/DMR/LR shoot-outs etc. Of course, things have changed, but iirc the changes to autos were generally to weaken them, not strengthen them.

As for what we take from these videos, that's different. Personally, unless the aesthetic looks utterly broken (as in, geometry clearly slapdash etc / horrific colour scheme) I don't give a fuck about matte or whatever. Others do. Some people don't care about equal starts, whereas, even if AR/Pistol (both being far more useful this time, especially the pistol), I really, really do.

And so on and so on and so on. What Halo comes down to is the eternal battle between memory and time. I LOVE every Halo, to different extents. I probably prefer 3 out of all of them, SP and MP. That makes me a heathen in some eyes, whilst my friends agree. C'est la vie. That's it. Until we play and exhaust Halo 5, we cannot truly ascertain where it stands for us, but if you go in over-hyped or utterly cynical, you're not being fair on it.

By RedSparrows Go To PostIt's 'obnoxiously positive' or negative because people have different Halos in their head, and, of course, some people are naturally more positive and optimistic/cynical and pessimistic than others, for good and ill.

The tourny did show that autos are much more viable now, but if I think back to Beta, I remember plenty of BR/DMR/LR shoot-outs etc. Of course, things have changed, but iirc the changes to autos were generally to weaken them, not strengthen them.

As for what we take from these videos, that's different. Personally, unless the aesthetic looks utterly broken (as in, geometry clearly slapdash etc / horrific colour scheme) I don't give a fuck about matte or whatever. Others do. Some people don't care about equal starts, whereas, even if AR/Pistol (both being far more useful this time, especially the pistol), I really, really do.

And so on and so on and so on. What Halo comes down to is the eternal battle between memory and time. I LOVE every Halo, to different extents. I probably prefer 3 out of all of them, SP and MP. That makes me a heathen in some eyes, whilst my friends agree. C'est la vie. That's it. Until we play and exhaust Halo 5, we cannot truly ascertain where it stands for us, but if you go in over-hyped or utterly cynical, you're not being fair on it.

Brilliantly said.

By RedSparrows Go To PostIt's 'obnoxiously positive' or negative because people have different Halos in their head, and, of course, some people are naturally more positive and optimistic/cynical and pessimistic than others, for good and ill.

The tourny did show that autos are much more viable now, but if I think back to Beta, I remember plenty of BR/DMR/LR shoot-outs etc. Of course, things have changed, but iirc the changes to autos were generally to weaken them, not strengthen them.

As for what we take from these videos, that's different. Personally, unless the aesthetic looks utterly broken (as in, geometry clearly slapdash etc / horrific colour scheme) I don't give a fuck about matte or whatever. Others do. Some people don't care about equal starts, whereas, even if AR/Pistol (both being far more useful this time, especially the pistol), I really, really do.

And so on and so on and so on. What Halo comes down to is the eternal battle between memory and time. I LOVE every Halo, to different extents. I probably prefer 3 out of all of them, SP and MP. That makes me a heathen in some eyes, whilst my friends agree. C'est la vie. That's it. Until we play and exhaust Halo 5, we cannot truly ascertain where it stands for us, but if you go in over-hyped or utterly cynical, you're not being fair on it.

Bravo, sir. Bravo. *searches for +1 button*

By derpface123 Go To PostImagine if someone just froze this OT until the week of October 27… We would all just go about our lives until there was actually a point to talking about Halo 5's mechanics and changes from previous titles, since we would have the game to determine just how significant those changes are. Also I imagine traffic would increase and there would be more positivity (unless the game is broken at launch, but… let's hope that doesn't happen).

Just a thought.

I'm actually looking forward to H5, but we've been trotted out this bs before H4 when people complained about random ordnance and perks and custom loadouts and ordnance drops and all the bad things in H4 that were revealed in that leaked magazine issue. We were told to "shut up until you've actually played it" or "you won't know it's a bad idea until you try it" or "don't worry, it's still Halo, it won't be as bad as it sounds". Welp. Some things don't require hands-on to offer valid criticisms.

As far as criticisms go for H5, my top list is as follows:

* GET. RID. OF. GRENADE. HITMARKERS. How are these still a thing? Fucking breaks any possible tension in matches. Might as well have PV.
* GET. RID. OF. SIMMS. I'm sure he's a nice guy but there will never be enough things happening to justify the amount of words he thinks he needs to scream every couple seconds. He'd be better shoutcasting a different game.
* Forcing you to "pick up" OS and the like. This is just dumb. "oh you wanted that OS and not the AR?" If you can't put priorities on pickups over weapons, don't make us pick them up.
* Weapon/nade outlines - I hope this is toggle-able.
* For some reason I still am not a fan of the sound designs. I think it's because everything seems so over-designed and trying to be hyper-realistic or something.

Oh, I don't agree with the powerup criticism. There were multiple times today where a guy tried to pick it up with no shields and died in the act. I like that over a scrub stumbling into it and being saved with no ability to fight back. I only wish it didn't "burn" it and was still available to pick up.

To be fair, comparing the pre-release fears about Halo 4 with your current gripes about Halo 5, the difference is night and day.

Ordnance vs grenade hitmarkers. I'd prefer both to be out, but I know which is the lesser evil! ;)

By Ram Go To PostOh, I don't agree with the powerup criticism. There were multiple times today where a guy tried to pick it up with no shields and died in the act. I like that over a scrub stumbling into it and being saved with no ability to fight back. I only wish it didn't "burn" it and was still available to pick up.

I wasn't criticizing the potential vulnerability while picking it up. That's fine in my opinion. My issue is that it's not prioritized over other things on the same location on the map for pick up. There could be no "scrubness" happening and you get screwed out of an OS because there's some random weapon on the ground in the same location. That's my issue.

By RedSparrows Go To PostTo be fair, comparing the pre-release fears about Halo 4 with your current gripes about Halo 5, the difference is night and day.

Ordnance vs grenade hitmarkers. I'd prefer both to be out, but I know which is the lesser evil! ;)

Sure, but this was a big criticism in H4 and H2A as well. While it might not be the case for Mr Randy Herpderp, it's extremely gameplay altering for almost anyone with a brain and actually *encourages* grenade spam, something that everyone is always bitching about.

By Ram Go To PostOh, I don't agree with the powerup criticism. There were multiple times today where a guy tried to pick it up with no shields and died in the act. I like that over a scrub stumbling into it and being saved with no ability to fight back. I only wish it didn't "burn" it and was still available to pick up.

Agreed.

The thing I don't fully get is this: the system is new, so I get people being iffy about it. But at the same time it still slots into the equal playing field, map control, timer control mantra. If it didn't, it'd be broken. As it is, it fits that. Thus, even if the mechanic feels alien and new, it's still a mechanic to understand and master and defeat enemies with. You know it happens, plan accordingly. I don't see it as broken or stupid, rather just different - even if I might prefer the old style at first glance.

Edit: and yes, the chief issue I have with it is getting the wrong pick-up.

By YourExWife Go To PostI wasn't criticizing the potential vulnerability while picking it up. That's fine in my opinion. My issue is that it's not prioritized over other things on the same location on the map for pick up. There could be no "scrubness" happening and you get screwed out of an OS because there's some random weapon on the ground in the same location. That's my issue.

True...could make it a different button or something. I doubt that would be a regular thing to have to worry about, but ya never know.

By Ram Go To PostTrue…could make it a different button or something. I doubt that would be a regular thing to have to worry about, but ya never know.

I saw it happen at least twice today on stream. When people fight over shit, people are gonna die and drop stuff. I suppose it might not be a big issue in Juices-tier play, but it's definitely something to consider.