Spawns

I've allready discussed what can result from receiving a poor spawn in relation to weapons and powerups, now I'd like to discuss spawns in general and spawning in Halo 2. A good player in Halo is most likely aware a large percentage of the spawn points on most of the maps within Halo: Combat Evolved. However due to an increase in spawn points and spawn locations mentally visualizing and interpreting spawns changes drastically in Halo 2. This evolution in reality is simply an expected piece of growth. As a project grows and technology increases the sample range will increase and available plots on a graph will grow. The location of the spawns in Halo were in my mind much more linear and measurable. The spawn points in Halo 2 appear to be what I consider much more organic and dynamic in relation to the map. While this growth in and of itself does not create a problem, the spawn programming appears to have created a spawn inconsisitency which adversely effects gaemplay.

There was a time a while ago when I was interested in the head to head matchmaking playlist. This was following the playlist reset after the Elo rating sytem was modified to prevent everyone from topping out at level 22-25. Well in one night of playing I went from a level 14 to a level 26 putting me in the top 25 players at the time. During my course of play there were several occasions in which i spawned and immediately punched my opponent in the back. Most of these games took place on Midship which has enough spawn points to prevent players from being close enough for hand to hand combat on spawn. However several times we both spawned below a base, or directly infront of the base, or both just behind the flag spawn in the base. This is once again a scenario when I had nothing to do with earning a kill. I have also had a similar scenario take place on Lockout. My team spawned at the ramp between top floor BR and the library, and the opposing team all spawned on the ramp behind sniper. Well atleast 3 of them spawned there, I'm not sure where their 4th spawned. I however spawned directly behind them on the ramp to sniper. As they proceeded up the ramp and were confronted with my teammates fire from BR I punched all 3 of them in the back. Of course I yell "triple kill!" into my mic while laughing out loud. Scenarios such as these seem to occur far too often within Halo 2. Sanctuary is also plagued with horrible spawns in every gametype.



Another major problem I have with is the timing of spawns, or oddball spawns in particular. This is a problem which is easily fixable with a playlist update. For some reason the problem I am about to discuss has been left in the game since its inception without anyone making note of the problem. In oddball if player X dies his respawn timer starts counting from 9 seconds. If his teammate player Y dies while player X is dead, he will receive a spawn time that is the exact same as player X's current remaining time. So if player Y dies while player X has 2 seconds left, he will spawn after only 2 seconds, being rewarded for the fact that his teammate was dead. Imagine this scenario: I kill player X then while fighting player Y we both die due to grenades killing us both at the exact same time. I will receive a respawn time of 9 seconds, while player Y receives a respawn time of probably 2 or 3 seconds. By having a teammate dead player Y gains an advantage of 6 seconds, in a gametype which is heavily dependent on time this is a problem. I have experienced the following scenario numerous times in double team. I kill player X face to face and then fight player Y, I do some damage to him but he kills me. Next my teammate kills player Y, he then respawns almost immediately, while I won't respawn for another 6 or 7 seconds. This leaves my teammate to fight both player X & Y by himself (only moments after he killed player Y). If my teammate were to die faster (counter-intuitive, counter-productive) he would be rewarded with a faster spawn. Instead of doing what he should be doing, which is trying to win by staying alive and gaining ball time, he would be rewarded for his quick death. There is no logic for this scenario or for this to take place. With much of the other stuff I discuss I can mentally create scenario's for many of the mechanics of Halo 2 to make sense, but I am unable to make sense of why this occurs. There is no logical or justifiable basis for such a spawn timing system. Nowhere within a competitive game with a ruleset of deaths & spawn time (penalty for dying) does such a principle make sense. Your respawn time is designed to give the team who killed you an advantage, one less player to fight, more availability of weapons and powerups for them while you are dead. This is an advantage they have rightfully earned and which is stolen by giving faster spawns as a reward for having a dead player.

The only gaming scenario where a quick spawn such as this makes sense is in a game which the spawns are based on a rolling timer which runs throughout the game. A couple of games that use this mechanic are Call of Duty & Battlefield. Dependent on the map size and player count there is a running spawn time of anywhere from 8-20 seconds or possibly more which everyone on the map respawn at in waves. Both sides of battle spawn in the same waves regardless of when they died. This is completely fair and allows for re-grouping and formulated attacks, and formulated defense. However this oddball spawn phenomenon is a broken mechanic, one team is spawning in a wave, while an opposing player isn't given the advantage of a spawn wave. This creates an advantage for the team who is dead, which is the opposite of what they earned. If anyone has an explanation for this phenomenon I'd love to hear it.

Playing H2

This is how I feel when I play Halo 2.
I also added a new article below FYI.

Balance

I have heard the argument since the release of Halo 2 that it is now a balanced game and is therefore better. With what logic a person arrives at such a conclusion is beyond my grasp. The thought that Halo 2 is balanced is asinine. Not only is Halo 2 unbalanced, but the slippery slope created by the imbalance in weapon strength is ridiculous. Let's examine the facts.

From the beginning of the match every player has essentially the same chance at acquiring new weapons and upgrading their abilities within the game. While this availability of weapons is actually changed due to weapon spawns it can almost be assumed that every player begins the match on equal footing. However the spawns dictate an enormous part of the outcome of the game from the very beginning. Examine the spawns on Lockout and Ivory Tower and you will realize how big a part of the game the initial spawn plays. Often one team will spawn with their entire team below airlift, and the opposing team at top BR & Library. This allows them to acquire sword, blow themselves sniper, and nade the entire opposing team as they airlift. Following this they can acquire the PP/BR combo and have every power weapon in the map. At this point the team of "have-nots" has very little they can do to try to gain an edge. The only option they are going to have for getting a kill are lucky grenades, and the hope that an opponent will fall off the map. In the Ivory Tower scenario very often one team spawns entirely back wall and one team spawns at Sniper & top OS. From this position they are able to snipe the opponent attempting to get the rocket launcher, get PP/BR/OS combo and kill sword guy for their teammate. The fourth teammate can then acquire the rocket launcher securing every power weapon in the map. Yes there is another PP available but likelihood of that being effective against four more well-armed opponents is very slim.

OK, so the imbalance created by the spawns has been discussed. Now let us examine the slippery slope created by the increased effectiveness of the variety of weapons. David Sirlin notes that "variety and balance are inversely proportional" in his article on Game Balance. This article is fantastic and applies to numerous videogames. I'd recommend his book as well. Anyway, a look at the gameplay environment created by the weapons is necessary. The ability for a newly spawned player to fight a sword opponent is futile. On numerous occasions I have spawned on Midship and proceeded to be immediately killed by a sword wielding opponent. In what realm of skill, or good gameplay that fits is beyond me, and in reality is one I don't want to participate. A newly spawned player severely damaging an opponent who has a PP/BR combo is also useless. Yes I know the PP blast can be effectively avoided, however the likelihood of this winning you the fight is very small and more often than not it is unavoidable. The primary component of designing balance is that every action needs to have a strength and a weakness. There is no designed weakness in the sword, none whatsoever. The only weakness of the sword is its inability to fight long range, however this is true of any short-range weapon so it isn't even a design characteristic.

Another fatal flow of the balance issue occurs with the sniper. A sniper is a person who shoots someone from a distance, and typically in real life from a concealed location. A sniper's ability to shoot from a distance should create an INABILITY to fight at close range. However due to the severe auto-aim and bullet pull of Halo 2 his ability to fight at close range can be just as good as long range if the sniper is wielded by a person with some skill. The ability to no-scope snipe then melee an opponent, or BXR them with the sniper a formidable opponent up close. This example is the opposite of balance. By increasing a player's ability to fight at long range, the game design should limit their ability to fight at close range.

Successful examples of correctly used advantage/disadvantage span the gamut of the gaming genre. Street Fighter allows for projectile fireballs, which can be used at a distance, but elimate the ability to attack up-close. An extremely powerful up-close attack is balanced by its inability to inflict damage at a long range. In Warcraft there are numerous characters who have the ability to inflict huge amounts of damage to other ground units & buildings. They however lack the ability to attack flying units. One of the earliest examples of checks & balances comes from a childhood favorite: Rock, Paper, Scissors. While rock will ALWAYS kill scissors, it is balanced by the fact it will NEVER kill paper. This game is an example of perfect balance.

Let's examine the gaming behavior designed into Halo 1. Which I still contend was a complete accident by the Bungie staff. A player who acquires the rocket launcher has an increased ability to kill his opponents quickly by using the splash damage of their rocket. However they are also susceptible to killing themselves with their own rocket's splash damage. A sniper player has the ability to quickly kill their opponents by the use of a skillful and difficult headshot. When used effectively a sniper can be dangerous and extremely effective. However a sniper is extremely hard and much less effective at close range. A sniper will also be extremely hard to use against an opponent who is shooting them with their pistol and keeping them unzoomed.

A second and important balance issue to consider in a FPS is timing or the duration to achieve a kill. The major fundamental flaw of Halo 2 is the timing created by the 4-shot kill. A stock BR player has very little chance at killing a PP/BR combo, Sword, Sniper, Shotgun, or even dual-wielder. However in Halo 1 a pistol wielding player is given an opportunity to kill an opponent if they are skillful with their weapon of choice. The ability to 3-shot a rocket opponent is very likely as they jump into the air and launch their rocket. While you may die after you 3-shot them you still achieved a kill. If you are approached close range by a shotgun opponent you have the ability to turn them and 3-shot them. Or you are also given the chance to double melee them, and likely kill both of you.

Superior skill, tactics & teamwork should be the deciding factor in victory, not superior weaponry. This is allowed for within Halo 1 creating a gaming environment which is balanced as well as being dynamic and varied. The gaming environment is essentially broken in Halo 2. This imbalance can cause the player to note on numerous occasions that "they knew what their opponent was going to do, but were left without an option to stop them." In Rock, Paper, Scissors if you know your opponent is going to throw rock, you can throw paper, etc. However in Halo 2 if you know he is about to sword you, there is typically no option for you to survive. The variety designed into Halo 2 creates a gaming environment which can be viewed as unique and dynamic, but in reality it is flawed and inconsistent.

Grenade Behavior

One of the many problems I have with the game which I already have shown in previous posts relates to the basic design physics of Halo 2. I've been playing a little bit online lately and it reminded me of one of the things I hate most about Halo 2: grenade explosions. I'm not quite sure if this is a problem that is encountered only on Xbox Live or whether it happens while LANing H2 as well. The only actual LAN time of any duration I have played in H2 was at MLG Houston and I can't remember if i encountered the same grenade problems I associate with Xbox Live.

Regardless, for what reason do the grenades have the ability to blow up in my hand? or in the air? Let's break down the scenario of what happens and how it effects gameplay. Player A sees playber B first, and throws a grenade. His ability to throw a grenade at his opponenent first is justified by the fact that he saw him first so thus far there is no problem. Player B does what is most likely his only option for survival upon seeing the incoming grenade, he throws a grenade back immediately. We'll assume player A's grenade was well placed and unavoidable by player B. Player B's chances of surviving this encounter are very small due to the fact that it only takes 1 BR shot before the explosion of the grenade to kill him. However as he throws his grenade at player A it explodes in hiw own hand, killing him. What.....the......hell. While player A's advantage at having thrown the first grenade is justified it is in no way justifiable that by making his only defense player B is killed. If you haven't had this happen to you, or seen it happen you either haven't played much Halo 2, or you aren't very observant. While this may only occur on Xbox Live that is still affecting 71 thousand players as I write this. Xbox Live is the area where the majority of Halo 2 gaming takes place, and therefore an unintentional gameplay occurence such as this is unacceptable.

I in no way am saying that I have only been on the losing end of this scenario. I remember one battle in Ivory Tower I was back wall on the OS side by the plasma rifle and was fighting an opponent at the top of OS ramp by the plasma pistol. We both fired a few shots, danced a little bit, then we both made a similar maneuver stepping behind the wall we were each standing next to. When we both stepped back out he threw a grenade, he was above me and I didn't feel throwing a grenade would help me much. As he released his grenade from his hand I was shooting my battle rifle at his head. His grenade exploded immediately in his face and killed him. This situation made me laugh out loud and literally say "wow, that is embarassing." I in no way earned that kill, perhaps I could have ended up BR-ed him, but I without a doubt hadn't earned the kill yet. It is these random occurences with the grenades that is a detrimental problem to the gaming environment.

Another fundamental question on the grenades is Bungie's choice to make them explode in the air off of an angled ramp. What is the design characteristic that causes the grenades to explode in this fasion? I'm sure we can logically sort this situation out, let's try. OK, perhaps the grenades explode in the air due to an initial impact timer. Upon throwing the grenades upon a slope such as the ramp leading up to sniper at Lockout results in a grenade exploding in the air, roughly just under a second after initial impact. Yes, this must be how they work, that makes sense. Actually, what if you were to throw the grenade off of a wall very high in the air, does the grenade explode after the initial impact? No, it's doesn't, it falls to the ground, bounces once, then when it lands from the second bounce it explodes. Well, this makes very little sense, does the grenade have a sensor which tells it "horizontal wall - Don't explode" or "slope - Do explode?" Well the slope isn't necessary because if you are to throw a grenade directly downwards it will fly back up, arching slightly away from you, and explode. Now what is the relevant difference between the grenade contacting the flat ground thrown directly downwards, and contacting a horizontal wall when thrown perpendicular against the wall?

This variance in the fundamental grenade behavior is quite perplexing and makes very little sense. This behavior introduces another layer of random variety which deteriorates gameplay, often reducing the predictibility of successful gaming. In a gaming environment the rule-set needs to apply equally all the time to combatants. In street fighter if Back->Forward+Punch creates a Sonic Boom with Guile it should create a Sonic Boom every time it is correctly executed. If at some point it for some reason creates a blade kick, or a spinning roundhouse then the game design is flawed. This never happens in Street Fighter, however the "grenade + ground = ?" equation is programmed into Halo 2. Once again I beg the question to Bungie: why?

Halo 2 Noobified

The following is a video displaying a few differences between H1 and H2. I like most of the stuff shown in the video, however some of the stuff is kinda dumb, such as the how they did the plasma rifle test. The footage showing the bullet-pull and sniper auto-aim is interesting. The breakdown between the 3-shot and the plasma pistol/BR combo is pretty cool too. Kinda ties in with my last article. Enjoy.

Who failed physics class?

It can be understood what a huge mountain the Bungie staff faced in creating Halo 2. The beast they had created in Halo 1 had thrived and taken control of the Xbox community. Their first game under Microsoft ownership became a system seller for the current premiere gaming console. In creating their next game they had to go bigger and badder, be more exciting, and push sales and imagination. The Bungie staff looked to their community and weeded through suggestions and found a legitimate addition to the Halo weapon roster: the sword. It was through the inclusion of the sword that the Halo universe was changed forever.

You can imagine the meetings taking place during Halo 2 development; exciting colorful storyboards, character sketches, and models strewn around an expensive office. Bungie employees throwing out ideas and bargaining and brainstorming attempting to peg down what the next invention gamers would be playing. At one point in these discussions someone mentions that "they could make the sword lunge at opponents!" What an exciting idea: a dashing attack involved with the sword, fantastic. This idea is taken and implemented, and yes, it's pretty cool. However if the sword is going to lunge when it attacks, the regular melee is gonna have to lunge when it attacks too. . .

The staff however sees no major problem with this, ok, so the melee's are going to lunge, big deal right? One fun and exciting part of Halo was that hand to hand combat was a very viable and important part of battle. Games have used melee weapons in the past with limited success, from slappers in Bond, to an array of knives in various games like Counter-strike. However typically these attacks were deployed by an alternative weapon. However in the Halo series you could simply punch someone with whatever weapon you wanted.

The Bungie staff has admitted when creating Halo 1 that the physics engine they created was basically based on what looked and felt right to them. However in Halo 2 Bungie outsourced the physics engine to a company known as Havok. While Havok has enjoyed success with their designs across numerous games, the application into Spartan and Covenant combat left something to be desired. If the Masterchief is to abide by typical laws of physics, then it must be questioned why he is able to break these frequently. While battling an opponent for what reason is the Masterchief able to achieve a sudden burst of speed forward allowing him to melee his opponent? What physical property allows the Masterchief the ability to increase his downward velocity due to gravity while swording or melee-ing an opponent? Are the rockets in Halo 2 heat-seeking to the temperature of the Masterchief? Are there shocks installed in his legs that prevent his suit from taking -any- type of damage due to falling. While I'm on the subject of dumb things I like to cry about why are the battle rifle bullets tracers? Tracer bullets in machine guns are typically used to signal the end of the clip. What Spartan engineer thought that was a good idea? Or really what Bungie employee thought "wow this is going to look cool, but will change the way the game plays entirely." I feel the muzzle flare is a great identifying way to find your opponents and served the Halo universe justly, however I digress.

All of these changes within the game create a gaming dynamic which is once again further from the success of the original. Over the years game design studios (such as Id, Blizzard, and Valve) have realized that if something works, stick with it and improve on it.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

However Bungie decided to modify the majority of the gaming cues that made Halo what it is. I believe this reasoning is dissapointing and foolish.

I can do without any comments informing me that "Halo 2 sold 2.4 million copies earning $125 million dollars in the first 24 hours!" Yes, this is amazing, making it the highest grossing release in entertainment history, surpassing Spider-Man 2. However the 1.5 million pre-orders, and millions of late night purchases had nothing to do with Halo 2, they had everything to do with Halo: Combat Evolved.

Bullet Math

Just a small idea i've had about the major changes in the shield system and the result the H2 weapons create. The major difference is the change in the number of shots to kill with and without headshots. Let's examine shields from both games.

Halo 1 Shield - required 5 pistol shots to the body (or 6 shots to the feet FYI ;-) ). If you were to headshot your opponent one could kill in only 3 shots (2 to the body to deplete shield, 1 to the head to kill), or 40% less shots.
Halo 2 Shield - required 7 battle rifle shots to the body, or 4 headshots (technically to kill 11 bullets to the body, and 1 bullet to the head), or about 43% less shots.

While these two flavors of shield behavior are not shockingly different, they can drastically change the gaming dynamic. The major difference between a 3 shot kill and a 4 shot kill is the ability to skillfully fight off a more well-equipped opponent. In Halo 1 every time a player spawned they were given a fighting chance to gain kills by strategically attacking their opponent. If you were faced with a rocket wielding player the pistol allowed you to 3-shot him in about the same time he would be able to kill you with a rocket. In Halo 2 however if you are faced with a sword opponent, a plasma pistol combo, or a rocket opponent your chances of killing them face to face with only the BR you spawned with aren't very likely.

Another strange behavior of the between the two shield designs is their reaction to fragmentation grenades. If a player was to receive 2 pistol shots (67% damage to a headshot kill, or 40% damage to straight body shots kill) they could be killed by a single frag grenade. In Halo 2 if a player receives one battle rifle shot (25% damage to a headshot kill, or 14% damage to a straight body shots kill) they can be killed by a single frag grenade. The statistical difference shown here is unrealistic. One must question why the frag grenade in Halo 2 is magically able to kill an opponent who has received such a small percentage damage. While the frag grenades appear to behave quite similar to Halo 1 grenades (overlooking their ability to explode in the air, and their ability to be blown up by other grenades) the major problem must be some type of design flaw with the Halo 2 shield.

There is one more interesting characteristic I have noted about the Halo 2 shield. While many players were shocked on the first launch into Halo 2 due to the removal of the health system there was a general belief that the two still behaved in a similar fashion. However in reality the shield system in Halo 2 is actually two shields. The outer shield is displayed and visually receives damage. The interior shield is invisible and receives damage upon depletion of the outer visible shield. The regenerative ability of this shield can be noticed by playing a no-shield gametype, such as the Swat matchmaking gametype. In a no shield game a player is killed by a single headshot or 3 shots to the body. However if a player were to receive 2 body shots and wait (read: hide) for around 10 seconds they could recieve a third without being killed. Or following the 2 body shots if they were to hide for about 15 seconds they would be able to receive another 2 without dying. Clearly the unseen "health" shield recharges itself much like the normal visible shield. This interior recharge applies when there is a normal visible shield as well. Following being shot 6 times a player may simply hide for a brief moment and re-join the battle unscathed. I feel without the penalty of losing health the overall dynamic of the game is changed again further from the amazing gameplay of Halo CE.

Allright I'm out... Happy Easter everyone.

Alien Weapons

With the evolution from Halo 1 to Halo 2 there were numerous changes in the arsenal of the marine forces. From the view of actually being in the storyline it must be assumed that the marines were unhappy with their current roster of weapons and therefore went through a thorough re-design of the majority of their stock. From the view of a gamer it must be assumed that Bungie was unhappy with the behavior of the guns in Halo 1.

It has been noted in the past that Bungie intended on having the H1 Assault Rifle be the weapon of choice due to its size and physical presence. However the designed roles of the AR and Pistol switched when the effectiveness of the pistol was soon recognized. This is a scenario change that personally raises no inherent problems. Would I have preferred the weapon which dealt the damage of the pistol look more like a powerful rifle? The truth is yes, I would have, however my masterchief character is not so vain that the size of his gun leads to metaphorical similarities, if you catch my drift.

Bungie solved this phallic imbalance in H2 by designing the dominant weapon to be a large powerful looking battle rifle, and the less useful backup weapon a small sub-machine gun. From an aesthetic standpoint these two guns look amazing and fill their proverbial roles very effectively. The most notable problem I find with the Halo 2 arsenal however is the alien weaponry.

The overbearing strength and necessity of alien weapons in Halo 2 is quite apparent from the beginning of the Halo 2 ad-campaign. As the implementation of the sword was revealed to the general public it soon became obvious that the sword was a weapon you would want to keep in your back pocket. I felt the sword was used beautifully in the campaign game: a limited number of hits based on an ammunition stock. However the implementation of the sword within the multiplayer mode (my main concern) was done without limitation. Very early on the sword became a focal point for all combatants.

The main problem with the sword is the general behavior and effectiveness of such a weapon. Most notably the sword offers infinite reward with little to no consequence. The sword can serve a similar function as the rocket in H1. With the flick of the trigger it creates what typically results in an instant kill over your opponent. However the two weapons have very different repercussions on the user. To earn the guaranteed kill of a close range rocket blast a player might have to sustain some damage, or even kill themselves if their opponent is able to successfully pin themselves against the rocket user. However with the sword there is typically no penalty necesary to reap the benefits of the sword. The sword kills opponents without consequence allowing a player to slash through their opponents left and right if used properly. The only real detraction which may result from sword use is falling off the edge of the map. However this is more of a game glitch then it is a penalty. It can also be noted that there is a slight pause between sword strikes which could be viewed as a penalty, however typically a player will change to their primary weapon before striking again.

Following the 1.1 Xbox Live update weapons balance was changed with the melee damage (which needed it) being strengthened. However following this update the strength of two alien weapons became even stronger. The use of the plasma pistol in conjunction with the battle rifle was already known to be of extremely powerful use, however now the use of the plasma pistol had even more applications. The plasma pistol became perfect for long range as well as close range fighting. A player would simply have to release their plasma blast on their opponent and melee them to assure an easy kill. If there opponent was to maintain distance to avoid a melee they could simply use their battle rifle backup to earn a kill.

The second major change of the 1.1 update was the increased strength of the plasma grenades. The "fuse" on the grenades was shortened and their strength was increased incredibly. It can be understood that a shortening of the fuse would make the grenades much more useful and a more integrated part of the game. However I do not understand the purpose of strengthening the grenades to their current level. To understand the major difference the strengths of all grenades must be considered:

• Halo 1 fragmentation grenades - Depleted shield and destroyed all except 3 yellow bars of health.


• Halo 1 plasma grenades - Same effect as frags, unless they were stuck to opponent.


• Halo 2 fragmentation grenades - destroys entire shield creating headshot vulnerability.


• Halo 2 plasma grenades - Kills opponent at feet, also kills when stuck to opponent.

There appears to be no necessary difference between the plasma grenades of H1 & H2. Why do the plasma nades kill? What extraneous factor allows them to kill without sticking their opponent? The major diffence between the two grenades is the fact that the plasma grenades allow for a kill on their own, with a built in deterent in that they take longer to explode if the stick is unssuccesful. Perhaps I am missing a storyline plot which should be explored. Are the grenades stronger at killing because they were designed by aliens, and therefore the aliens would be more effective at killing their wartime opponent? Well this could be true, however the plasma grenades kill spartans and elites with the safe proficiency.

The previous ideas on the strengths of the alien weapons are in no way trying to insinuate that gameplay involving alien weapons is somehow inferior or less fun than human weapons. It is simply to point out an inherent and often unexplainable difference between the Halo 1 and Halo 2 weapon behavior.

Powerups

The use of powerups within the game design of Halo 1 was something very unique and special for competitive gaming. One major quickly noticeable difference between the powerups in Halo 1 and Halo 2 is their major differences in effectiveness. The Overshield (OS) and Active Camouflage (Invis) served as a noteworthy advantage when they were used properly. They also could typically be countered properly by an opponent, plasma weapons for the overshield and baiting for the active camouflage. In Halo 2 however the behavior of these powerups is radically different, most notably the behavior of the overshield. Due to the glowing effects of the overshield on the posessor it usually serves as a bulls-eye not an advantage. When opposing players see two enemies in close proximity to each other their first instict is to shoot the one with the glowing blanket on their armor. The invis in H2 is also quite ineffective at adding an advantageous stealth to a player. Most players will note that they have very little trouble seeing invis players and they can typically light up their shield with the spray of the battle rifle.

Another major difference between the powerups of the two games is the variety of their respawn. The powerups in Halo 1 always respawned at explicit time intervals which ran from the beginning of the game. A useful weapon respawn chart was compiled by HBO beginning in 2002, of which i was a contributing member. The respawn of these powerups creates a fair playing field for all combatants to gain an advantage by picking up one of the powerups. The powerups in Halo 2 are based on set timer intervals for each powerup, however their respawn clock begins when a player picks them up. The Beaver Creek OS has a 1 minute respawn from when picked up, the Ascension OS is somewhere around 2:21 respawn from when picked up. As a side note I am unsure of why Bungie used vastly varying respawn times such as 1:23 for the Ivory Tower OS, perhaps they believed uneven respawns would discourage players from actually timing their spawn, which is moronic to assume. Good players will always use whatever they can to legitimately win, which is allowed and expected.

I believe the powerup difference between the two games shifted the dynamic of the game tremendously to something that is quite "un-Halo." It is my contention that the powerups in Halo 1 serve much like blinds in Poker: they create action and force drama while being applied fairly to all participants. It is expected at high levels of competition that every minute there will be a fight for OS, Invis, or rockets (dependent on which is spawning). However in Halo 2 if a team is able to secure both the sniper rifle and the sword (if the map contains either) early on they can typically be assured of victory. While this is not a steadfast rule and in no way suggests that by simply having the sword a team is guaranteed victory it does illustrate a major gameplay difference between the two games created by the lack of effective powerups.

I will be discussing the respawn of power weapons in a future article. . .

HotCiSioN Double Shot

The following is a video of HotCiSioN showing off his double shot skills with the battle rifle. This video is an example of one of the numerous Halo 2 glitches. While this is a very impressive video displaying his amazing ability to use the double shot to his advantage it is also a display of weapon usage outside of the design intended by the Bungie staff.

Beta Testers?

Like any other well-designed videogame both installments of the Halo series endured rigorous testing procedures. These testers serve numerous purposes such as giving feedback on the game itself, discovering glitches and problems with the game, and testing the playability of the game as a whole. I feel that one error that Bungie Studios made when making the sequel to Halo: Combat Evolved was their failure to include experienced Halo players in the testing process.

One competitive multiplayer combat game over the past 13 years is Magic: The Gathering which is designed by Wizards of the Coast. While Magic is not a videogame it is a competitive multiplayer game which has been successful worldwide for a number of years. The Magic world championship tournament scene awards hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. Professional Magic player turned professional poker player Jon Finkel earned just under $300,000 playing Magic before turning to poker. The important aspect of Magic which Wizards of the Coast has embraced is their ability to learn, adapt and change. Wizards uses what is known as a "Future Future League" to test decks and cards which are going to be released in the future. This research and development staff is typically comprised of former professional Magic players and others involved with the development of the game. It is through the influence of professional players that the Magic series has thrived over the years while the variety of their cards and gameplay possibilities has increased. I feel that Bungie's failure to include professional Halo 1 players into their roster of beta testers of Halo 2 resulted in many major problems.

Outside solicitation for beta testers for Halo 2 was completely discouraged due to the fact that the only people that would be testing the game would be limited exclusively to licensced Xbox developers. Since Bungie is owned by Microsoft the only testers for Halo 2 were also required to be developers from Microsoft Gaming Studios. These qualifications trimmed down the pool of available testers considerably. While these testers profession is testing games, they are without a doubt not professional halo players.

These testers lacked the in-depth understanding of the Halo world to recognize gameplay strategies, important weapon strength considerations as well as many other gameplay flaws. The list of flaws overlooked is staggering.

• YXR - Superman Lunge used effectively with Battle Rifle or Rocket


• BXR - Melee to headshot creating an instant kill


• BXB - Double Melee


• RRX - Double Fire


• RRY - Suicide Shot


• Superbounce on numerous maps

This is in no way a comprehensive list of the errors and glitches which were left in the original release of Halo 2.

Due to their inability due to lack of man-hours as well as the proper mindset for gameplay the beta testers were unable to recognize these glitches left within the game. Or perhaps these glitches were noticed but simply left within the game.

Another major problem which testers failed to realize was the disparity of weapon strengths. The most notable of these is the combination of the Plasma Pistol with the Battle Rifle. Through months of testing none of the testers recognized the strength this weapon combination possessed. However by the first evening of gameplay of Halo 2 online the majority of the top-tier players were already using this ridiculously powerful weapon combination to secure victory. It is through the Future Future League that Magic has been able to eliminate problems such as this with cards that are too powerful to be played in open play and tournaments.

The testers and game designers also failed to realize the ineffectiveness of the Battle Rifle due to the inacuracy of the bullet spray. For months the entire online gameplay of Halo 2 revolved around A) Securing the sniper rifle and B) maintaining a supply of Battle Rifle / Plasma Pistols. As noted in his Sirlin's article on Game Balance, Part 1 if an extremely powerful trick such as the Combo appears within a multiplayer game the game will divulge being only about the trick, and not about the game. The usage of the combo creates a severe imbalance in gameplay which is extremely hard to overcome. Due to the programming of the game these glitches were not overcome following the release of the 1.1 live update, which is quite sad.

Unfortunately Bungie Studios failed to look towards successful game testing programs to help alleviate these problems. Perhaps they will solicit the help of professional halo players for their next project, although this idea is doubtable.

Reduced Velocity = Reduced Skill

One of the things I noticed very early on following the release of Halo 2 was a noticeable difference in the character motion than Halo 1. By further inspecting and visualizing the differences between the two games one will quickly notice the fact that the H2 character is much larger compared to the map surroundings. Due to the actual reduction in map size (Compare lockout to Hang 'em High or Midship to Damnation) the horizontal velocity of the character has been reduced to maintain a similar flow in gameplay. This increase in character size with a reduction in velocity creates a lower necessity for reticule correction while fighting a moving character. i.e. shoot a full sprint deer or an injured hobbled one. The product of this change is more kills with a lower number of shots.

This change in H2 creates what could be viewed as a larger mass appeal to the average player. Based on the number of games sold and number of those attending tournaments a very small percentage of H2 players play at a highly competitive level. The "dumbing down" of the Battle Rifle allows for the average player to consistently 4-shot their opponent, which fundamentally eliminates the definition of individual player skill in H2. If a player in H1 were to 3-shot their opponent at a consistent level, say upwards of 75% they would be extremely hard to stop.

It is due to the style of the BR that it is extremely hard for one player to take out 2 opponents, and almost impossible to take out 3 solely with a BR. In H2 when a player is shot in the back by a BR their chances of turning around and killing the opponent are very small, without help from their teammates. This is very obvious due to the fact that the person who shot first most likely will be able to 4 or 5-shot their opponent, leaving them no opportunity to out-BR them. In Halo 1 however a good player may receive a shot to the back, turn around and 3-shot their opponent while out-dancing them to disrupt their opponent. Due to the reduction in horizontal velocity the effectiveness of a players "dance" is almost negligible in Halo 2. In H1 an effective player would also have an effective dance which would aid them in pistol battles. These dances vary from player to player based on personal preference and experience.

It is hard to pinpoint the reason why the Halo series changed in its style of gameplay to the one used in Halo 2, however there may be a few reasons. One plausible reason for this change is most likely due to the level of skill of the players who developed the game. This is in no way an insult on Bungie staff members as being bad Halo players. Their job is not being good at video games, their job is designing them. However with this change they were able to kill opponents at a greater efficiency rate, which for any player always feels rewarding. However the style was changed without assessing what it would truly due to the level of gameplay. In reality the variance may simply be due to the fact that the H2 single player mode was changed with the new engine, which changed the multi-player game without even realizing the inherent differences between the two games. More on game design and the flaws of which coming soon. . .

Yo

First post, ideas coming soon...