Support NeoGAF

[FUNKNOWN iXi]

Which tight corridors? Be specific, because there were a lot of them. And they all played the same.

...Did I mention how repetitive CE was? Besides, if anything, Halo 3 had far bigger battles that give a feeling of a war better than any battle in CE. Additionally, Halo 3 did have those same battles you described. Take the Ark. You have Choppers and Ghosts scattered about in the Scarab battle, and if you took the time to walk through the level you could fine miscellaneous weapons like rocket ammo and sniper rifles.

For one, those Scarab battles weren't as fun as you describe them to be IMO. Capable of causing so much destruction in the fiction but easily destroyed and can hardly kill you with its main beam lol

Also, the same thing can be said about Halo 1 in terms of exploration to find weapons and other goodies. Halo 3 Brutes just can't compare to the Halo 1 Elites either, so enemy encounters never felt tough or truly engaging because the gunplay felt weak. The vehicle combat felt decent though, but Halo 1 also had great vehicle encounters.

I didn't become a Halo 3 campaign believer until years after launch. Took me a long time to appreciate it, but now I absolutely love it. I still think Halo 1 is slightly above it because I feel like the gun/gameplay is better, but Halo 3 is definitely a very well thought out game.

I agree with this.

 

[Rickenslacker]

I didn't become a Halo 3 campaign believer until years after launch. Took me a long time to appreciate it, but now I absolutely love it. I still think Halo 1 is slightly above it because I feel like the gun/gameplay is better, but Halo 3 is definitely a very well thought out game.

3's campaign definitely aged gracefully. I find myself in the same boat.

Not that I'm a Halo player, I only properly played Halo 2 (and enjoyed it) on my brother's Xbox back in the days, but I really appreciate Bungie as a dev and can't wait for Destiny.

But there is one thing: can you guys explain me in simple words what did 343i do to Halo 4 that so much people ended up hating it? What is so different from previous ones? They fucked the story, right?

It's a mix of a lot of things, from a lot of contingents of the Halo fanbase, for a lot of different reasons. I'll try to list some things that I've gathered from others along with some of my own disappointments. The campaign had a reduction in scale, they removed theater functionality from campaign which killed a lot of motivation in the speedrun community. Firefight was replaced with Spartan Ops which as a mode overall was a very repetitive and shallow replacement. And multiplayer has had many changes that killed the pacing and fun, like making sprint a baseline mechanic, continuing with AAs despite being an unwelcome change in Reach, loadouts, global and personal ordnance, perks, instant respawning, completely changing how CTF works, and each of those reasons having their own nested layers of problems.

 

[MaximumFlipFlop]

You know, sometimes when someone wants to express a legitimate concern, they should construct posts that aren't befitting a crying baby. I remember lots of these posts, and while there were some that could properly express their points, most were filled with gratuitous name-calling and hyperbole. No one wants to respond to those.

Remember when you basically told those of us with huge issues with halo 4 to leave HaloGAF and go away? Yeah...

 

[daedalius]

Remember when you basically told those of us with huge issues with halo 4 to leave HaloGAF and go away.

More like, I don't understand why you'd keep playing a game you dislike so much; much less repeatedly posting about it and how much you dislike it.

I'd think you'd rather spend time on something you enjoy.

 

[sp3000]

Having worked on every single Halo game since Halo 2, I can tell you that with every release, a significant swathe of people decided it had died. Halo2sucks.com was a real, energetic thing. Gameplay tastes can be really specific, to the granular level, and you will shake out a strata of taste with every iteration.

A common complaint in Halo 2, for example, is that the pistol is nerfed, because a three-shot-kill pistol from anywhere on the map was going to be problematic online, in a way that it wasn't when you were playing in a LAN. And so you had huge amounts of people who quit for that reason alone.

Also, making Halo 4 was TOUGH, but "hell" is relative. There will be other devs reading that article and scoffing at our version of "hell" because they went through way worse.

Halo has never lost more players than it has gained with its iterations. You had fans of the previous game always leaving each time a new Halo game released, but there was a huge portion of new fans that stayed with the new game for years to come. However, it is disingenuous to imply that Halo 4 has not experienced a population decline far faster than the other games.

Yes, you want to expand accessibility. Which is industry-speak for getting players who only play Call of Duty to play your game instead. Perhaps you ought to consider what the effects of doing this are.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

Not that I'm a Halo player, I only properly played Halo 2 (and enjoyed it) on my brother's Xbox back in the days, but I really appreciate Bungie as a dev and can't wait for Destiny.

But there is one thing: can you guys explain me in simple words what did 343i do to Halo 4 that so much people ended up hating it? What is so different from previous ones? They fucked the story, right?

I can only talk from my perspective but there's a couple of issues.

Campaign wise.
1. they made cortana a whiney bimbo in contrast to the badass hasley.
2. they made the game needlessly look at your hand every time you pushed a button, even if you were in a room of crowded enemies and were trying to escape.
3. a) the enemy encounters felt stagnant after a while because they're primarily the same as covenant encounters.
3. b) the enemy designs were weak, they added nothing to the sand box in terms of new gameplay encounters.
3. c) the enemy designs are difficult to understand, its hard to find weakspots or to tell if your dealing dmg
4. a) weapons were bloated, there are too many similar ones.
4. b) many of the weapons were hard to understand, such as the promethean grenades
4. c) the weapons felt more like additional purchases for the multiplayer then meaningful gameplay additions.
5. you're never forced into changing gaming habits through the game due to repetetive game design, enemy design and limited sandbox.
6. vehicle sections forced and were often fustrating, or they were simply linear rail sections.
7. weapons despawned
8. graphics meant that lod was an issue with zooming in and overall it was harder to see what was happening or what/where enemies were.
9. QTEs
10. the story was hard to understand unless you activated the terminals.
11. level designs were smaller and more linear
12. encounters were smaller and provided less opportunities for custom gameplay choices
13. ai felt less challenging

I'm sure theres more.

multiplayer wise is more of a fundemental change in game design philosphy.

pretty much everything stems from the fact that the game doesn't place everyone on equal footing and that map design lacks weapon spawns which remove tactical advantages of positioning. These are conerstones of halo 2-3. In reach the addition of loadouts were heavily frowned upon, in halo 4 they were expanded upon further with perks and custom loadouts. The codifying of the multiplayer meant that there was no competetive aspect to the game anymore, add in a lot of the broken and unblanced mechanics, and killstreaks which actively punish good players it's just not the halo experience I want.

Overall.
the removal of features like theater. The net code and matchmaking was less spectacular, and spartan ops is something i keep forgeting about, which tells you hoe impactful that is on me.

either way, theres a lot of stuff in halo 4 that I'm just not a fan of.

 

[cluto]

Yes. It's all about wwm0nkey and what he wants! He still has a blast playing H2 so naturally everyone should! He hates when people say nostalgia is blinding him because its totally not and the older games really DO hold up.

Look buddy. I like Halo 2. Love it. Its my favorite in the series. But we need to move the FPS genre forward and looking back/living in the past is doing no one any good. Halo: Combat Evolved seems to be lost on you.

We can have it both ways. 343 can move the genre forward without trashing what made Halo great. Halo fans aren't saying they want Halo 2 every year with some new weapons and maps -- they're perfectly fine with change as long as those changes are meaningful and improve the gameplay experience (see: vehicle-boarding, theater, etc.). There is a theoretical Halo game out there that makes intelligent changes to the design and also reinforces Halo's strengths.

Unfortunately, 343's first attempt to "push Halo forward" was mostly an endeavor to beat Call of Duty by following in its footsteps. That's what Halo fans are upset about.

 

[wwm0nkey]

We can have it both ways. 343 can move the genre forward without trashing what made Halo great. Halo fans aren't saying they want Halo 2 every year with some new weapons and maps -- they're perfectly fine with change as long as those changes are meaningful and improve the gameplay experience (see: vehicle-boarding, theater, etc.). There is a theoretical Halo game out there that makes intelligent changes to the design and also reinforces Halo's strengths.

Unfortunately, 343's first attempt to "push Halo forward" was mostly an endeavor to beat Call of Duty by following in its footsteps. That's what Halo fans are upset about.

Sums it up pretty nicely actually.

 

[Future PhaZe]

Halo needed to change, and it still does. People may give 343 hate because its so different but times are different. They may have missed the mark but they are on the right track (in terms of thinking differently about the series)

Nostalgia does crazy things to perception.

huh

they did exactly what they shouldn't have, which was basically to build upon Reaches mistakes.

I actually think they should have just left the arena style gameplay to the original trilogy and built Halo 4 as a direct competitor to Battlefield on the MP side, and looked to expand on ODST's hub world ideas campaign wise.

Halo as an arena style shooter peaked at 2/3. A whole trilogy of them continuing to try to make minimal adjustments is going to result in diminishing returns from a mindshare standpoint.

 

[sp3000]

Halo as an arena style shooter peaked at 2/3. A whole trilogy of them continuing to try to make minimal adjustments is going to result in diminishing returns from a mindshare standpoint.

That's hilarious considering Halo 4 has diminished the mindshare of the entire franchise more than anything else, even with it's vast changes.

 

[Future PhaZe]

That's hilarious considering Halo 4 has diminished the mindshare of the entire franchise more than anything else, even with it's vast changes.

which was my point

 

[sacrificengineer]

@ les papillons sexuels
@ wwm0nkey
@ Rickenslacker

Thanks for explanations. Well, at least most of it seems fixable.

 

[Doran902]

We can have it both ways. 343 can move the genre forward without trashing what made Halo great. Halo fans aren't saying they want Halo 2 every year with some new weapons and maps -- they're perfectly fine with change as long as those changes are meaningful and improve the gameplay experience (see: vehicle-boarding, theater, etc.). There is a theoretical Halo game out there that makes intelligent changes to the design and also reinforces Halo's strengths.

Unfortunately, 343's first attempt to "push Halo forward" was mostly an endeavor to beat Call of Duty by following in its footsteps. That's what Halo fans are upset about.

great points

and when you look at call of duty, they did exactly what they should have

modern warfare was a huge success and every cod since then is the same basic game with the types of improvements you listed

I'm not a huge cod fan but i know for a fact that the core cod 4 gameplay is still in tact. I don't feel like the core halo gameplay is intact in halo 4.

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

Reading this....I kind of feel like you are only comparing it to Reach.

Also Cosmetic only unlocks is how Halo should have stayed, fuck getting any advantage via unlocks its a stupid system and it only works in CoD. CoD and Halo are different games and should be treated as such.

The simple solution is to provide separate playlists for upgrades and without. Personally I have no interest in investing months of my life into a game where I don't progress in any way. In a post COD/WoW world that kind of game design is antiquated. But let people choose and definitely bring back the old ranking system. I felt like Reach's cosmetic upgrades were idiotic and my friends would laugh at how we were expected to dress up our Master Chief like a Barbie Doll with no meaningful impact on anything. I don't know who that crap is meant to appeal to, little girls? It's almost insulting. When I realized I was "upgrading" my character in Reach and it didn't do anything in the game, I was pissed. Absolutely disgusted with Bungie. It was the moment where I felt like Bungie had fallen so far behind Infinity Ward that Halo multiplayer was starting to become a joke and not keeping up with the modern world let alone leading it.

 

[wwm0nkey]

@ les papillons sexuels
@ wwm0nkey
@ Rickenslacker

Thanks for explanations. Well, at least most of it seems fixable.

It is very fixable but it wont be done until the next game for obvious reasons. Now that 343 has the team fully together and they know their mistakes they have the chance to make the next Halo great.

The simple solution is to provide separate playlists for upgrades and without. Personally I have no interest in investing months of my life into a game where I don't progress in any way. In a post COD/WoW world that kind of game design is antiquated. But let people choose. I felt like Reach's cosmetic upgrades were idiotic and my friends would laugh at how we were expected to dress up our Master Chief like a Barbie Doll with no meaningful impact on anything. I don't know who that crap is meant to appeal to, little girls? It's almost insulting. When I realized I was "upgrading" my character in Reach and it didn't do anything in the game, I was pissed. Absolutely disgusted with Bungie. It was the moment where I felt like Bungie had fallen so far behind Infinity Ward that Halo multiplayer was starting to become a joke and not keeping up with the modern world let alone leading it.

Yeah that seems to be the conclusion people at 343 have come to as well.

 

[sp3000]

Yeah I always have to admire COD, even though I hate the games, because it never bows to any other franchise.

Since 2007, the core COD gameplay has barely changed. In that same time period, you have every single franchise falling over itself trying to copy COD, from Halo to Crysis. Battlefield might be the only one that still retains its old identity.

The simple solution is to provide separate playlists for upgrades and without. Personally I have no interest in investing months of my life into a game where I don't progress in any way.

If you need a bunch of unlocks to tell yourself that you are progressing along with carrot on a stick mechanics to get some sense of fullfillment, that's pretty sad. The actual gaining of skill is the only sense of progression that is real.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

The simple solution is to provide separate playlists for upgrades and without. Personally I have no interest in investing months of my life into a game where I don't progress in any way. In a post COD/WoW world that kind of game design is antiquated. But let people choose. I felt like Reach's cosmetic upgrades were idiotic and my friends would laugh at how we were expected to dress up our Master Chief like a Barbie Doll with no meaningful impact on anything. I don't know who that crap is meant to appeal to, little girls? It's almost insulting. When I realized I was "upgrading" my character in Reach and it didn't do anything in the game, I was pissed. Absolutely disgusted with Bungie. It was the moment where I felt like Bungie had fallen so far behind Infinity Ward that Halo multiplayer was starting to become a joke and not keeping up with the modern world let alone leading it.

and yet moba's, the most played genre of games, rely on the primary lack of player investment to ensure stable and competative gameplay.

If anything I think the carrot on a stick is the cheap design philosphy. It's the easy way out, the simple and meaningless approach to game design. I shouldn't play a game to get better through practice and skill, i should be working to get better stuff so I'm better without having to be good. It's sickening and I was insulted and disgusted by 343 when I heard they were implementing it. It's what made me realize why Bungie were such amazing devs in compairson to companies like infinity ward who rely on manipulation instead of quality to keep people playing their games. It's sad when people need to buy their skill, because they feel entitled to it. I mean, who are they trying to appeal to? little girls who buy clothes for their dolls because they think they need upgrading? why cant they just get an imagination?

 

[super-heated plasma]

I still really like Halo 4. I am a Halo fanboy, no doubt, but even I admit there needs to be some improvements. I want clans back for starters....

My cousin and I play Halo Wars every night even. We love that game. Please tell me Frankie, that we will see a Halo Wars 2 in the future? PLEEEAASE?

 

[NullPointer]

The simple solution is to provide separate playlists for upgrades and without. Personally I have no interest in investing months of my life into a game where I don't progress in any way. In a post COD/WoW world that kind of game design is antiquated.

This honestly makes me sad to read. You're advocating breaking a game's core design in order to add treadmills and make those treadmills seem useful.

You can have progression without game changing unlocks.

Personally I have no interest in investing months of my life into a game where I don't progress in any way.

What happened to playing for fun? Playing for competition?

Having to be fed a steady diet of gaming reward pellets for every action destroys pure gameplay and equal competition. Instead of players trying to capture the objective, or working together to bring the team a victory, it will all boil down to whatever actions will net the most XP or unlock the next item or achievement.

This is what happens in all XP/Progression based games, and its a slow degeneration until the next big thing comes along, and all the XP/Achievement whores abandon ship for the next pre-order mountain dewified double-XP boosted multiplayer.

I'll admit that it feels more rewarding to unlock a game changing ability or weapon, but that reward comes at a tremendous cost. For the love of gaming, we should be inoculating ourselves from this, not purposefully spreading it.

 

[ido]

My favorite Halo video of all time. Relevant because of how awesome the first game was, how much time people put into deconstructing every little piece of it, and how basic and amazing the gameplay used to be. We have to go back.

Maptacular

 

[thezerofire]

eh, most of HaloGAF/Halo community would only be happy if the game was Halo 2 HD.

LOL

 

[The Tofunator]

The simple solution is to provide separate playlists for upgrades and without. Personally I have no interest in investing months of my life into a game where I don't progress in any way. In a post COD/WoW world that kind of game design is antiquated. But let people choose. I felt like Reach's cosmetic upgrades were idiotic and my friends would laugh at how we were expected to dress up our Master Chief like a Barbie Doll with no meaningful impact on anything. I don't know who that crap is meant to appeal to, little girls? It's almost insulting. When I realized I was "upgrading" my character in Reach and it didn't do anything in the game, I was pissed. Absolutely disgusted with Bungie. It was the moment where I felt like Bungie had fallen so far behind Infinity Ward that Halo multiplayer was starting to become a joke and not keeping up with the modern world let alone leading it.

This type of mentality has destroyed the first person shooter genre. What happened to developing personal skill at the game, instead of being led along with artificial progression mechanics that unbalance the game in favor of those who have played the longest?

 

[MyAbsolution]

I think the way Bungie handled the interaction with outside lore + game lore really well (Reach purists am cry). My favorite example of this would be the Cortana "moments" in Halo 3 where what she says are

Spoiler

direct quotes from Dr. Halsey in "Fall of Reach"

It doesn't punish those that are not aware but serves as a little nod/reward to those "in the know."

343 can get it right. I have faith.

I guess as a Reach/Novel purist I am cry.

Bungie mauled Halo-Canon, their own canon, with a sledge hammer. Then curb stomped it twenty times. Dead Space style.

This type of mentality has destroyed the first person shooter genre. What happened to developing personal skill at the game, instead of being led along with artificial progression mechanics that unbalance the game in favor of those who have played the longest?

IMO, destroyed online gaming this generation in general. Not just FPS.

My cousin and I play Halo Wars every night even. We love that game. Please tell me Frankie, that we will see a Halo Wars 2 in the future? PLEEEAASE?

Good god. LOVED HALO WARS >_<!! Played it for well over a year with my friends.

Actually its one of my top Halo games lol.

 

[wwm0nkey]

If you need a bunch of unlocks to tell yourself that you are progressing along with carrot on a stick mechanics to get some sense of fullfillment, that's pretty sad. The actual gaining of skill is the only sense of progression that is real.

Honestly this is probably why I loved Halo 2 so much and how Ranks were actually a good thing for casual players too.

You start off as level 1 and you will not leave that level until you show progress but the game matches you up within 2-3 levels of yourself (sometimes 5) so that you can play with people who are a bit but not a lot better and whoever wins gets to show off that they are learning more about the game and doing better. For the most part 1-10 was learning the basics which didn't take long. 10-15 was refining and building skill. 15-25 was pretty much learning how to use team work to win a match and 25-50 was perfecting your skill at the game.

The ranks in Halo 2 made you learn and become more competitive but it made the experience VERY enjoyable and was a GREAT way to learn the mechanics at your own pace.

The 1-50 Halo 2 system needs to come back. CSR isn't bad but it just can't compare.

 

[Poker Face]

My favorite Halo video of all time. Relevant because of how awesome the first game was, how much time people put into deconstructing every little piece of it, and how basic and amazing the gameplay used to be. We have to go back.

Maptacular

I love this video. Definitely one of my favorites as well.

 

[Karl2177]

Brute Halo can be best Halo when the encounter design is the best. Also, the Brute Pack was awesome:

Even though I highly praise Halo 3 for having the best encounters, it was actually missing something that Reach had, and that was urgency of finishing the kill. It largely had to do with the "Elite" role that the Brutes had to fill for Halo 3. Because the Brutes didn't regenerate shields, the combat could go to, what I'm going to call, a 50/50 mode. This is where you only worry about stripping the shields, because you know can clean them up later. I can think of quite a few scenarios in Halo 3 that would have been much more awesome if there was a bit more urgency for the kill.

 

[Future PhaZe]

Honestly this is probably why I loved Halo 2 so much and how Ranks were actually a good thing for casual players too.

You start off as level 1 and you will not leave that level until you show progress but the game matches you up within 2-3 levels of yourself (sometimes 5) so that you can play with people who are a bit but not a lot better and whoever wins gets to show off that they are learning more about the game and doing better. For the most part 1-10 was learning the basics which didn't take long. 10-15 was refining and building skill. 15-25 was pretty much learning how to use team work to win a match and 25-50 was perfecting your skill at the game.

The ranks in Halo 2 made you learn and become more competitive but it made the experience VERY enjoyable and was a GREAT way to learn the mechanics at your own pace.

The 1-50 Halo 2 system needs to come back. CSR isn't bad but it just can't compare.

Halo 2 RIP

I made a big chunk of my friends from that game because I was FORCED to talk to people and make relationships because you had to speak to be effective as a team or you'd actually DROP IN RANK.

As you got to the high ranks of 40 you really had to think about who was coming with you into matches. If you went on a bad run you'd have to either bail out on your team or find some way to stop the bleeding or you were going to lose progress.

Not mention people played customs on the regular.

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

Yeah I always have to admire COD, even though I hate the games, because it never bows to any other franchise.

Since 2007, the core COD gameplay has barely changed. In that same time period, you have every single franchise falling over itself trying to copy COD, from Halo to Crysis. Battlefield might be the only one that still retains its old identity.



If you need a bunch of unlocks to tell yourself that you are progressing along with carrot on a stick mechanics to get some sense of fullfillment, that's pretty sad. The actual gaining of skill is the only sense of progression that is real.

Why does it have to be one or the other? In racing games you unlock new better cars, but that doesn't destroy multiplayer.

Like I said, let people choose how they want to play. If some people feel that it gets boring not being able to upgrade and obtain new abilities then they have something to keep the game fresh for them. If you want to just play for skill rank then let those people have a playlist too. For me I remember Halo multiplayer being fun until I hit a skill level wall where every match became brutal and punishing. The game essentially broke at that point. I wasn't getting better, I just stopped being able to have fun. I don't care who you are, everyone psychologically wants to win many more games than they lose.

The idea that there is no skill involved in Halo 4 or CoD multiplayer is absurd though.

 

[MyAbsolution]

Why does it have to be one or the other? In racing games you unlock new better cars, but that doesn't destroy multiplayer.

Like I said, let people choose how they want to play. If some people feel that it gets boring not being able to upgrade and obtain new abilities then they have something to keep the game fresh for them. If you want to just play for skill rank then let those people have a playlist too.

The idea that there is no skill involved in Halo 4 or CoD multiplayer is absurd though.

The concept is that with this generation and "evolution" of Halo/CoD... the skill involved is decreasing. Not that there is none, but that the games mechanics and depth have been gutted over the years to make them easier.

 

[Poker Face]

Why does it have to be one or the other? In racing games you unlock new better cars, but that doesn't destroy multiplayer.

Like I said, let people choose how they want to play. If some people feel that it gets boring not being able to upgrade and obtain new abilities then they have something to keep the game fresh for them. If you want to just play for skill rank then let those people have a playlist too. For me I remember Halo multiplayer being fun until I hit a skill level wall where every match became brutal and punishing. The game essentially broke at that point. I wasn't getting better, I just stopped being able to have fun. I don't care who you are, everyone psychologically wants to win many more games than they lose.

The idea that there is no skill involved in Halo 4 or CoD multiplayer is absurd though.

But people don't do this. You're playing on Xbox Live. Players are going to abuse and exploit anything they can. Eliminating perks, customizable loadouts, and armor abilities will decrease the amount of things players can find to exploit, therefore making the game more enjoyable and not "fuck why didn't I choose the DMR instead of the suppressor"

If you hit a skill level where you were being destroyed it probably meant you weren't good enough to be that level in the first place. (not blaming that on you, as you should have de-ranked)

 

[wwm0nkey]

Halo 2 RIP

I made a big chunk of my friends from that game because I was FORCED to talk to people and make relationships because you had to speak to be effective as a team or you'd actually DROP IN RANK.

As you got to the high ranks of 40 you really had to think about who was coming with you into matches. If you went on a bad run you'd have to either bail out on your team or find some way to stop the bleeding or you were going to lose progress.

Not mention people played customs on the regular.

Yup, the game encouraged communication heavily which was a great thing and a lot of games are missing now. We have no reasons to leave party chat unless it benefits us like it did in Halo 2.

I personally think the reason why progression is so popular is because after Halo 2 no one on consoles really tried a hardcore skill systems that also was used as a learning function for new players.

Also Zombies in Halo 2 > every other Halo for the fact you had to move boxes to use as cover. Seriously there needs to be an option to pick up and move boxes in Halo 5 when in zombies mode.

 

[NullPointer]

Leave progression systems and unlocks for campaign, co-op modes or beginner tutorial versus playlists.

 

[eXistor]

Probably the most unengaging Halo for me, I don't really see a reason for it to exist. Not bad, just utterly unremarkable (sp that is, I don't play mp). Hopefully they'll give Halo 5 somewhat of a personality.

 

[bidguy]

that sounds worrisome. i mean the campaign was awesome (halo 4) but the mp was a mess.
i really loved the progression system and the ranks of halo reach (reclaimer, inheritor and all that stuff) and was disappointed with the lack of thought of the mp ranks. i mean SR ? come on.

 

[Penguins&PolarBears]

The concept is that with this generation and "evolution" of Halo/CoD... the skill involved is decreasing. Not that there is none, but that the games mechanics and depth have been gutted over the years to make them easier.

I think that's kneejerk though. You can do both. Both elements can evolve together. You can give people the reward of dedicating time to level up and the reward of getting better at the game. You can make it so that people unlock playlists based on skill level that offer character upgrades for example. You can separate playlists based upon how people want to play the game.

They will never admit it but what these Halo fans are saying is they want the game to basically be like Madden, just a fresh coat of paint on the same old game. If you can't bring in character classes, upgrades and perks then you're ignoring a lot of game play features that people enjoy in shooters. Not saying implementing these features is enough, but it is the bare minimum now. You can walk and chew gum at the same time though and keep a skill level ranking that is meaningful for people.

 

[wwm0nkey]

I think that's kneejerk though. You can do both. Both elements can evolve together. You can give people the reward of dedicating time to level up and the reward of getting better at the game. You can make it so that people unlock playlists based on skill level that offer character upgrades for example. You can separate playlists based upon how people want to play the game.

They will never admit it but what these Halo fans are saying is they want the game to basically be like Madden, just a fresh coat of paint on the same old game. If you can't bring in character classes, upgrades and perks then you're ignoring a lot of game play features that people enjoy in shooters. Not saying implementing these features is enough, but it is the bare minimum now. You can walk and chew gum at the same time though and keep a skill level ranking that is meaningful for people.

Ok I will say this and I am sure others will too. Not every single game needs those things and a lot of people do not like those things either. Yes there are some games that can work with it but Halo didn't need to and could have evolved in different ways.

EDIT: Oh and you ruined your Madden comparison. Instead of just one series becoming the same thing every year you want every game to be the same game every year apparently? Games need to evolve in different ways that are not just CoD.

 

[NullPointer]

If you can't bring in character classes, upgrades and perks then you're ignoring a lot of game play features that people enjoy in shooters. Not saying implementing these features is enough, but it is the bare minimum now.

Tell me more about how you'd like to destroy everything I enjoy.

I can't even properly fathom how myopic this viewpoint is. These are "the bare minimum" now? SMH.

I'll say this though, at least you're upfront about it, and not hiding behind marketing terms and exclusivity periods like 343 was in the run-up to Halo 4's release.

 

[LowEndTorque]

The single player campaign in Halo 4 was gud. I liked it a lot. Haven't tried the multiplayer and probably never will thanks to the gold pay wall. The article makes it sound like a highly bureaucratic development environment which is unsurprising considering the stakes, budget and MS corporate culture.

 

[TUROK]

I really would not have minded an extremely non-traditional Halo if it was awesome, but Halo 4 just wasn't.

I remember when it was barely announced, there was talk that we would finally get to see what the Chief is made of, that the powerful yet agile ability of the MJOLNIR armor would finally come through in a tangible gamplay form.

What did we end up with? A sprint button.

Or how they would hype the fuck out of the weapon sounds, saying things like they're going to be so badass that you'll want to use them even if there are more powerful weapons available.

What did we end up with? Some decent sounding guns, a pistol that sounds like a cap gun, and a Battle Rifle that sounds like a fucking squeak toy.

 

[dragonelite]

Chasing a market that doesn't care about your game by bringing in people who don't like your game

RIP Halo

I think most publishers and studios would to have so many players online as halo 4 has.
But for a halo game it is disappointing.

Halo 4 as a game is great game.
But for a halo game its all over the place.

Halo 4 is like that nice snack i take and forget in a week about.
Halo 3 was like that one great meal that stays on your mind for years to come. Wondering will i ever get such a meal again.

 

[JNT]

Many of the flaws of Halo 4 aside, I was really disappointed by how the game performed in split screen. Me and my buddy work like a well oiled machine in both co-op and in matchmaking when playing in split screen, but in Halo 4 the performance issues basically makes it impossible to play at our best (especially on forge maps).

 

[Nowise10]

The single player campaign in Halo 4 was gud. I liked it a lot. Haven't tried the multiplayer and probably never will thanks to the gold pay wall. The article makes it sound like a highly bureaucratic development environment which is unsurprising considering the stakes, budget and MS corporate culture.

Halo 4's campaign would be even more amazing instead of playing on a UNSC space station on the mission Composer, the composer was still on the Halo Ring, and you played on it their instead.

But I really did enjoy the campaign alot. Let that team do what the want again.

 

[bishoptl]

One of the more frustrating things was to have fans express legitimate concern over design choices only to have the Creative fucking Director of the game passive aggressively tweet pictures of crying babies. Keeping it classy.

Don't be a moron. That picture was tweeted a year previously.

Hey Retro - first of all, I'm sorry that you aren't enjoying the MP experience in H4. I just wanted you to know that the picture you posted here is a shot of my son trying to climb a tree. It was tweeted a year ago when we were camping. It wasn't an attempt at antagonizing you or anyone else in the Halo community. I was laughing at my son's inability to move as he was paralyzed by fear. I thought that it was a pretty funny moment worth sharing.

Anyway, carry on.

 

[TryHardShounen]

Well, if their passion was so intense for Halo 4 then I hope that they put that same passion, albeit with more organization, into Halo 5. Especially with next-gen tech and Microsoft's infinite money.

 

[OverHeat]

Don't be a moron. That picture was tweeted a year previously.

Nice someone with common sense!
You should take a look in the community Halo topic one day.

 

[Muffdraul]

The single player campaign in Halo 4 was gud. I liked it a lot. Haven't tried the multiplayer and probably never will thanks to the gold pay wall. The article makes it sound like a highly bureaucratic development environment which is unsurprising considering the stakes, budget and MS corporate culture.

I enjoyed it, but after it was over I soon realized that it doesn't stand up to Bungie's best, because unlike the previous Halos I had no desire to replay it 5 or 6 time until I finally became bored. Twice was more than enough for me. And there were certain things about it that just made me roll my eyes. Remember that super early leaked vid of very rough animation showing a character picking up another character with telekinesis? I was dead positive that was fake, because I couldn't believe 343 would put something so incredibly tired and generic in a Halo game. Same goes for when I first heard there would be a bipedal walking mech vehicle in the game. I refused to believe they would do something so generic. But not only did they do it... the actual mech in the game is one of the blandest and least imaginative ones I've ever seen.

But yeah... generally speaking, the campaign wasn't exactly terrible.

 

[les papillons sexuels]

I think that's kneejerk though. You can do both. Both elements can evolve together. You can give people the reward of dedicating time to level up and the reward of getting better at the game. You can make it so that people unlock playlists based on skill level that offer character upgrades for example. You can separate playlists based upon how people want to play the game.

you cant if johnny boy is using mommies credit card to buy him a weapon or perk that beats yours.

They will never admit it but what these Halo fans are saying is they want the game to basically be like Madden, just a fresh coat of paint on the same old game. If you can't bring in character classes, upgrades and perks then you're ignoring a lot of game play features that people enjoy in shooters. Not saying implementing these features is enough, but it is the bare minimum now. You can walk and chew gum at the same time though and keep a skill level ranking that is meaningful for people.

no one is saying they want madden, what they want is a good game that doesn't rely on trash game design and carrot on a stick mechanics. Coat of pain, look no further then cod, same game different skin, every year. Halo odst and halo 3 are fundementally different games with very little complaints, so your analogy is broken right from the start. The bare minimum is just that, it's the trash heap of garbage game design, you can continue to play it, but I'm looking for more engaging design that doesn't exist in your rigid bare minimum world.

counterstike doesn't rely on classes, upgrades or perks, many games dont rely on classes. Keep balance and competitve gameplay and people will come back to it.

 

[LastNac]

As someone who really enjoys the game series but doesn't read the EU, I wish some of the stories and narrative was more contained within the actual game. I deleted waypoint years ago so I don't even have access to the terminals. Supplemental material should support the game, not the other way around.

 

[KageMaru]

Great article, always love reading these types of articles at this site.

Nice to see them ackowledge they made mistakes and I find some of their approaches, like finding people who didn't like Halo, interesting.

Also I thought some people on GAF got past being so negative on Halo 4 or 343i. IMO they have made some mistakes and Halo 4 isn't the best in the series, but it's still a great shooter and a good Halo. It could have turned out much worse, so I don't understand why some people need to spin everything around in such horrible ways.

 

[Dirtbag]

I like that they are recognizing the bigger flaws in the game and how they got to that point to hopefully course change for 5.
I'm mainly skeptical because 343 has really been alot of talk though. Lots of 'feels just like halo', and trust us, and soon.
Trust is earned, you don't get that luxury just cuz you have a plush ign review and some fancy dev hires.

It's their first game and they took over a flagship franchise from one of the best developers in the game. Rather then innovating a 'more approachable' halo, they should have dove head first into making the game fundamentally halo first and gotten that right. I knew it was fucked that day we all read that first magazine article leak detailing perks, ordinance drops, and all that other shit.