Correct but I do find the friendly frag element helps prevent a bit of spam since there's more risk involved. I hardly ever get killed by a friendly frag tbh.
Gaming Halo Infinite | Season 2 launches May 3rd - comes with two new maps!
- Thread starter Bojan11
- Start date
As long as there was even 1 dmg by an enemy, it gives them the kill. So yeah, i don't die to friendly frags much, but they definitely seem to contribute to damage I take quite a bit. Have had my shield dropped plenty to then be 1 popped by an enemy.
Definitely think the group of mates I play with is part of the problem though.
No, why would I play Vanguard? It's probably shite and it's not made by Raven anyway so it's hardly relevant. I couldn't give a toss about it. Actually the biggest issue for Raven is having to integrate shite like that into Warzone.
I just don't see the point in comparing Halo to WZ. Two very different games. You're so weird trying to justify Microsoft games being good. I still think it's a smooth, solid, but really safe and and far from special multiplayer experience. It is incredibly polished and fair play to MS for delaying it to make it so, they've totally nailed that aspect, it seems to even run really well on the shitty launch Xbox. And I am looking forward to playing the campaign based on the reviews.
Warzone is far more ambitious, at least, but they're incomparable games in just about every way. Plus Halo (and loads others, like the awful BF2042) has copied loads combat and movement wise from Modern Warfare/Warzone which says it all! There's a lot wrong with Warzone but to call it buggy based off loading it up when they just released the biggest content overhaul since it launched so you can compare it to Halo negatively is silly, that's all. I've played it since launch and bar a few hiccups when they add new stuff or big content it's been really smooth for me and my mates on PC, maybe not the same on console, I haven't played it on it.
They're porting Warzone onto the Vanguard engine, no? So I'm saying, if I'm having issues in Vanguard on little arena maps (which is apparently so easy to deliver against) it's fair to assume it isn't just a 1 day thing. Regardless, I didn't load it up following the biggest update at all. I even said in my post 'besides being laggy and buggy' and instead compared visibility, graphics (yes, tighter on an arena shooter but at the same time - no next-gen version on warzone still, no fov etc is disappointing) isn't impacted by being a new map. I wasn't comparing Halo to Warzone generally - but after playing Warzone last night, it made me appreciate those polished elements of Halo more than I'd realised. You're equally weird trying to justify Microsoft games not being so good, or why Warzone is good and shouldn't be spoken about in a negative light. Get a grip mate, you live in these threads like everybody else and are just as much a gimp as the rest of us. Embrace it.
If I had loaded vanguard, battlefield etc. last night, I'd have got the same feeling. They're both shooters, and something like visibility isn't because of the scope but the design choices and is true for warzone's smaller cod counterparts. Don't take it personally.
I've got an embarrassing 186h 48m Play Time apparently (and has some time on another account - doesn't sound true to be honest..) on warzone - having played it since launch too. Doesn't change anything I've said.
No they use the same engine. It's more like they're trying to include all the guns etc. from Vanguard in Warzone which makes things messier. It's always buggy after a big new content drop, unfortunately.
My take all along was that Halo isn't that good. Why would I want to justify an MS game not being good? Two of my favourite games this year (Psychonauts 2 and AOEIV) are MS games. I have a Series X and Gamepass on PC for feck sake
I just don't find Halo to be that... exciting. I appreciate it for what it is but multiplayer FPS games have moved on and it's not quite up there for me. I think I'll enjoy the campaign a lot though, been ages since I played a good FPS campaign (DOOM I guess). Warzone can definitely be spoken about negatively, just check the thread, I moan about it all the time, it's far from perfect, as I said. My point is comparing it to Halo to make Halo look good after it just got a big content drop is silly. You can't accept the stupidity of comparing the two, that's fine, you're blinkered by your love of all things MS and think everything they shit is gold, good for you. I'm not the one who started comparing them, if you are going to criticize another popular game then it's only natural to expect people to call you out on it.
That wasn't what I was doing though, it's just you projecting. I played a game, me and a few others loaded noted the comparison immediately, I posted about it on the thread. Simple as that pal. If you're gonna get defensive, I'll project back.No they use the same engine. It's more like they're trying to include all the guns etc. from Vanguard in Warzone which makes things messier. It's always buggy after a big new content drop, unfortunately.
My take all along was that Halo isn't that good. Why would I want to justify an MS game not being good? Two of my favourite games this year (Psychonauts 2 and AOEIV) are MS games. I have a Series X and Gamepass on PC for feck sake
Warzone can definitely be spoken about negatively, just check the thread, I moan about it all the time, it's far from perfect, as I said. My point is comparing it to Halo to make Halo look good after it just got a big content drop is silly. You can't accept the stupidity of comparing the two, that's fine, you're blinkered by your love of all things MS and think everything they shit is gold, good for you. I'm not the one who started comparing them, if you are going to criticize another popular game then it's only natural to expect people to call you out on it.
It's the same engine underneath but a modified version, and I was under the impression they were porting to that modified version to bring movement, feel and other nuances over with it. Anyway, it really doesn't matter, but the less vanguard influence on WZ the better cause technical issues aren't just big content drops and have been present since launch on a much smaller scale.
You haven't called out the comparisons I made, you've just said 'you cant compare cause of scale' which is nonsense for the specific elements I compared. Make a good argument first before calling other people blinkered. It's daft to think that a BR couldn't possibly be compared to a normal shooter on elements which are consistent with it's smaller-map counterpart. If I had spoken about map design and said that the spaces feel better crafted compared to buildings in warzone - obviously that's a nonsense comparison.
You keep saying I'm being defensive, I was just calling out that what you're saying is nonsense, in the grand scheme of things. You picked a really specific scenario when a big content patch had been released to try and compare the two, I pointed out that it's an unfair comparison.
I wouldn't say Halo, on PC at least, is any more polished, or smooth to play, or runs any better, anyway. I get similar FPS on both and I'd say Warzone pips it for overall fluidity and aiming, that's just my take. It's a more satisfying shooter, overall, even excluding the BR elements. On console that may be different, I can't say. Halo did run lovely on my Series X.
I think it says a lot that I've been critical of both games and you haven't said a bad thing about Halo yet and made a point to compare it with another game and just criticised that throughout, I'll leave it there
Literally on the post you took issue with, I said melee is fecked, grenades are OP and before that have said lack of co-op is shit, and they need to increase number of modes. But you see what you wanna see mate.You keep saying I'm being defensive, I was just calling out that what you're saying is nonsense, in the grand scheme of things. You picked a really specific scenario when a big content patch had been released to try and compare the two, I pointed out that it's an unfair comparison.
I wouldn't say Halo, on PC at least, is any more polished, or smooth to play, or runs any better, anyway. I get similar FPS on both and I'd say Warzone pips it for overall fluidity and aiming, that's just my take. It's a more satisfying shooter, overall, even excluding the BR elements. On console that may be different, I can't say. Halo did run lovely on my Series X.
I think it says a lot that I've been critical of both games and you haven't said a bad thing about Halo yet and made a point to compare it with another game and just criticised that throughout, I'll leave it there
I've played more and more and my opinion of the game has changed/evolved.
At the core i think the game is solid the gunplay the map design (needs more maps) are good.
I think the game is absolutely fantastic on a console with a controller and great on a pc with a controller.
Mouse on the other hand its absolutely trash UNLESS you specifically queue on the solo ranked mode by input device.
This sounds stupid but if you play crossplay you get absolutely dominated by controllers not just the fact a decent player hardly ever misses a shot due to the bullet magnetism/aim assist but also because they seem to have some huge form of aim assist on the melee so they rarely miss and seem to jump half a screen away towards you. From my experience on melee with a keyboard i actually have to aim it and at no point do i teleport straight to the opponent and lock on i just miss if it isn't on them.
I've never played a game before where i queue up strictly in a mouse only game and i dominate then go on crossplay and struggle (relatively) and no matter the range in game you instantly can tell what the opponent is using to play the game its that obvious.
I know @Alock1 is going to say its fine, but honestly i've never seen such a drastic difference.
Does this make it a bad game nope as the majority of playerbase will be console users, this is just my experience maybe i shouldn't be expecting it to be an evenish playing field.
If they "fixed/balanced" the two more i could easily see this being my fill in game between long apex sessions, either way its a good game just use a controller if you have the option or queue via just your chosen input!
Edit:
May also be a bug or bug abuse seems to be some mental aim assist bug for controllers where it goes into overdrive like the clip below
At the core i think the game is solid the gunplay the map design (needs more maps) are good.
I think the game is absolutely fantastic on a console with a controller and great on a pc with a controller.
Mouse on the other hand its absolutely trash UNLESS you specifically queue on the solo ranked mode by input device.
This sounds stupid but if you play crossplay you get absolutely dominated by controllers not just the fact a decent player hardly ever misses a shot due to the bullet magnetism/aim assist but also because they seem to have some huge form of aim assist on the melee so they rarely miss and seem to jump half a screen away towards you. From my experience on melee with a keyboard i actually have to aim it and at no point do i teleport straight to the opponent and lock on i just miss if it isn't on them.
I've never played a game before where i queue up strictly in a mouse only game and i dominate then go on crossplay and struggle (relatively) and no matter the range in game you instantly can tell what the opponent is using to play the game its that obvious.
I know @Alock1 is going to say its fine, but honestly i've never seen such a drastic difference.
Does this make it a bad game nope as the majority of playerbase will be console users, this is just my experience maybe i shouldn't be expecting it to be an evenish playing field.
If they "fixed/balanced" the two more i could easily see this being my fill in game between long apex sessions, either way its a good game just use a controller if you have the option or queue via just your chosen input!
Edit:
May also be a bug or bug abuse seems to be some mental aim assist bug for controllers where it goes into overdrive like the clip below
How's everybody finding the campaign?
Really wasn't sure on it at first, but it's grown on me a lot. I just wish there was co-op. The game feels so geared to that, 6 months(+?) feels so far away.
Really wasn't sure on it at first, but it's grown on me a lot. I just wish there was co-op. The game feels so geared to that, 6 months(+?) feels so far away.
I'm enjoying it so far, although I don't find the story as gripping as the early Halo games'.
I can’t come off multiplayer to try the campaign, having too much fun. The fluidity of multiplayer feels very good, not CoD rapid speeds and not sluggish like battlefield. Enjoy the maps too
Happy you can bypass most of the open world timefillers. Barring one mission.
Finished anyway, quite good overall, guess I'll revisit it on legendary when coop is out.
Started the campaign today on Heroic and I found it much easier than Heroic on previous games (the Bungie ones).
Also, I have both a Series X and Series S in the house and I really didn’t notice much difference between them which shows how good a machine the S is for the price. Seems to hit 60fps no problem and actually loads faster than the X, probably because of the lower res assets overall.
Also, I have both a Series X and Series S in the house and I really didn’t notice much difference between them which shows how good a machine the S is for the price. Seems to hit 60fps no problem and actually loads faster than the X, probably because of the lower res assets overall.
So after trying this for some time (as a keyboard and mouse player), I've decided that the pace of Halo games just isn't for me. The time to kill is far too slow for my liking, I'm a long time battlefield player so that probably explains why it feels a little slow/sluggish. I also hate how overpowered melee feels.
I was the same. I also felt like the first couple of missions were a bit unrelenting in skirmishes with enemies but once you get your first Fob it dies down a lot and you can pick or choose your battles. It seems a bit like a Halo meets Red Dead Redemption, except there's a lot more guidance on side quests and where to go. Quite enjoying it as RDR and Halo are my two favourite games.
I think that's my gripe with the multiplayer too. It seems far more suited to a controller than a keyboard and mouse because it takes so long to kill someone, shields recover so quick, and melee is so powerful making movement more important than aiming at times. It's objectively really good, but more better suited to consoles.
Loving it myself. For me this is the best Halo has been since the original and Halo 2.
Yeah, there's a pretty strong aim assist when using a controller too. Definitely feels more like a console game but I still enjoy it with KBM
Most definitely geared towards consoles (to be expected to be fair) my brother is high diamond switched to a controller after being hard stuck and is only improving. That’s from someone that’s got over 3000 play hours on cs:go.
Just queue up as solo by input in ranked and the difference is night and day to the crossplay option.
Melee and grenades are by far the biggest gripe in the game for me. Also the amount of team focus the game has is a big issue for me as a solo player (could argue that’s more on me then the game itself) you have to be seriously better then your opponents to turn around any 1 v 2 situation if the other 2 players are competent and can aim.
One of my favourite aspects of online shooters is outplaying a 1 v 3 etc but it’s infinitely harder on halo.
If you want to say it's geared towards something, it would be controllers, not PC. You are free to use a controller on PC, most very good players will be doing so.
Agree the melee needs reworked. If anything a bit more stiffness would be good a la Halo 3. Seems a bit random at the moment as to who gets the kill or trades.
Ha, what? Most people who play FPS on a PC over a console don't do it so they can use a controller.
The professional scene will spell it out properly, i imagine it will be a ratio of around 90% controller maybe zero MnK players.
If you compare that to a Warzone or Apex its a much more evenish split so crossplay can be done to a relatively fair degree just depends what the developers want in this case it seems controller/console
If you compare that to a Warzone or Apex its a much more evenish split so crossplay can be done to a relatively fair degree just depends what the developers want in this case it seems controller/console
What are the other 10% using then?
The challenge they have is that their only options are to give mnkb aim assist, which wouldn't go down well, or to tone down aim assist for the majority of their player base who will then feel worse at a series they have always been good at. Do that and people will play less or stop completely.
The aim assist has always been high on Halo but it didn't really matter as it was controller only.
I think that is a slightly out of date assumption. A lot of people nowadays will play on PC so they get the best competitive advantage in FPS games that are cross platform.
Theres gotta be some form of bullet magnetism already as the battle rifles zoom is basically irrelevant no matter what distance still getting hit markers.What are the other 10% using then?
The challenge they have is that their only options are to give mnkb aim assist, which wouldn't go down well, or to tone down aim assist for the majority of their player base who will then feel worse at a series they have always been good at. Do that and people will play less or stop completely.
The aim assist has always been high on Halo but it didn't really matter as it was controller only.
The biggest advantage to doing that is keyboard and mouse, though, followed then by frames (which doesn't really matter all that much for Halo if you have an X or S anyway).
There are no metrics out there to back either of us up but I'd bet the number of PC players out there for any FPS who willingly use a controller over KB+M is minimal at best.
Well in all of the competitive, cross platform titles I'm in any way clued in on, most of the pros play controller on PC, because of the clear advantage in terms of aim assist. CoD, Warzone(debatable calling them pros with no league), Halo, also I believe there are a number of pro Apex players using controller(granted, I don't know a lot about that scene, it may not be as relevant there). All of these titles are played on PC in a competitive setting(i.e. at events).
We're probably talking about two different things. If you mean the ultra competitive top 0.1% of players then maybe, I don't follow it. But most gamers play FPS on PC with a keyboard and mouse, surely?
I suppose it depends where they've come from. In the case of Warzone at least, I believe a serious amount of people have moved to PC for the performance/FOV improvements since the launch, but still use controller as original console players. This is what I've personally gathered from reading forums/comments on YouTube and stuff like that. For FPS titles that originated on PC(where nobody uses controller), I would definitely agree with you.
Probably fair. Took my mate a while to switch to keyboard and mouse when he got his PC and played Warzone with us on that instead of PS4, he much prefers it now but hated it for a while so I guess some people probably stick with what they know.
I know plenty of people that have bought gaming pc's to play controller on in the last year or two with the competitive advantage of 240hz and FOV settings and being able to tweak your graphics for maximum frames and features such as nvidia reflex lowering the input lag.
If anyone is relatively serious about competitive gaming and wants the best experience and the smallest of advantages then PC is the way to go.
The controller v mouse debate is one that can go on forever from what i've experienced researched and seen its actually quite well balanced in warzone/apex there is pros and cons to each input method, i'll always be mouse as a purist as that's total skill its directly your input so its the only way to have competitive integrity.
You have to see how good some people are on controller these days to appreciate its not as clear cut as it once was.
If anyone is relatively serious about competitive gaming and wants the best experience and the smallest of advantages then PC is the way to go.
The controller v mouse debate is one that can go on forever from what i've experienced researched and seen its actually quite well balanced in warzone/apex there is pros and cons to each input method, i'll always be mouse as a purist as that's total skill its directly your input so its the only way to have competitive integrity.
You have to see how good some people are on controller these days to appreciate its not as clear cut as it once was.
Currently sat waiting for the credits to end so I can finally see the Legendary ending (post credits cutscene). It's taking forever
That's awesome. The guy on the right looks a bit creepy but the sound it awesome
I think I am most the way through the campaign now, on Heroic to ease myself in. A few notes:
1. Elites aren't the formidable opponents they once were. They're just dumb damage sponges, same as Brutes, and it's really frustrating. Especially the supposedly higher ranking Elites, which just charge you at a certain point... They're supposed to be clever, use cover and attempt to flank you.
2. Grunts aren't nearly cowardly enough, which means there's no reason to prioritise targets any more. In the original trilogy if you got rid of the Brute or Elite in the group, the Grunts would run away making the battles (on higher difficulties) slightly easier. Only slightly because the Elites or Brutes were a task in themselves... In this game I just find myself killing whatever gets in front of my cross-hairs. The Grunts even melee you if you get close, which goes against literally everything written about them previously.
3. Jackals are pretty decent and probably the only improvement in terms of enemies.
4. On the whole I enjoy the big open world, though. I just wish enemy AI behaviour was more in line with the first trilogy.
I also miss the plasma rifle, probably one of the coolest weapons in the series.
1. Elites aren't the formidable opponents they once were. They're just dumb damage sponges, same as Brutes, and it's really frustrating. Especially the supposedly higher ranking Elites, which just charge you at a certain point... They're supposed to be clever, use cover and attempt to flank you.
2. Grunts aren't nearly cowardly enough, which means there's no reason to prioritise targets any more. In the original trilogy if you got rid of the Brute or Elite in the group, the Grunts would run away making the battles (on higher difficulties) slightly easier. Only slightly because the Elites or Brutes were a task in themselves... In this game I just find myself killing whatever gets in front of my cross-hairs. The Grunts even melee you if you get close, which goes against literally everything written about them previously.
3. Jackals are pretty decent and probably the only improvement in terms of enemies.
4. On the whole I enjoy the big open world, though. I just wish enemy AI behaviour was more in line with the first trilogy.
I also miss the plasma rifle, probably one of the coolest weapons in the series.
Agree on everything
I've finished the game on Legendary and they have seen them do exactly that plenty of times.
I've seen them run away after a leader has died once or twice thus far, and not particularly far.