343 Continuing the "Halo" Series is Flogging a Dead Horse

Times have changed into more so realistic fps.
The Halo Saga was completed. It had it’s time.
Halo Reach was an utter spit stain on any fond memories I have of Halo.

Anything next will be a joke, lucky to sell 10 000 copies.

People involved in making ‘Halo 4’ are most likely noob game designers or washed up from a bigger industry.
I say don’t embarrass the franchise any more and just let it die.

Opinions?

Sounds like you just insulted 343i.

I’m sorry you feel that way. If you can do better, by all means I suggest applying for a position. I would think that you would want the memories to continue, so why not lend a hand and help them make the series even better.

As for realism being the better FPS. That’s a matter of opinion. I’ve been to war. Playing a “realistic” FPS is something I do not like.

Two reasons:

  1. Real firefighting is nothing like gaming, which can give the false impression by glorifying war and the tragedies it can cause.
    B. I prefer sci-fi gaming to the realism, as I already played war in real life. It wasn’t fun.

> Sounds like you just insulted 343i.
>
> I’m sorry you feel that way. If you can do better, by all means I suggest applying for a position. I would think that you would want the memories to continue, so why not lend a hand and help them make the series even better.
>
> As for realism being the better FPS. That’s a matter of opinion. I’ve been to war. Playing a “realistic” FPS is something I do not like.
>
> Two reasons:
> 1. Real firefighting is nothing like gaming, which can give the false impression by glorifying war and the tragedies it can cause.
> B. I prefer sci-fi gaming to the realism, as I already played war in real life. It wasn’t fun.

Lol at bolded. (Of course there are some people who enjoy it, but they are at best called adrenaline junkies and more accurately called psychopaths. They’re dangerous too, not the kind of person you want in your squad.)

What’s the old saying? Real war is 90% sitting around in your camo pants doing nothing and 10% crapping in them.

If you’re avoiding CoD out of PTSD then more power to you, but I don’t think that will represent the majority of the population. It’s not the Sci-Fi part that turns people off, it’s the gameplay. I dislike having to shoot someone 4 times in the head to kill them. Not only that, but there isn’t much ambushing or stealth in Halo, seeing as how you’re brightly colored and stand out like a sore thumb. Halo is all about the vehicles and crazy power weapons: I’d say that Halo is almost more of an action Game than a shooter. Whatever floats your boat.

Though plot-wise I’d have to say that it’s kind of a stretch unless 343 wants to keep making prequels. Kind of like HW… hmmm on second thought maybe that isn’t such a bad thing. :wink:

I personally prefer sci-fi shooters…
I wasn’t saying what’s better… but sadly at the moment CoD holds the crown.

Reach was a slow paced weird halo/cod hybrid.
They made that game so noob friendly and random.
With terrible maps and spawns.
It actually feels like when I play it’s insulting my intelligence.

Removed some content from this thread because it was inappropriate and against the guidelines. If we continue to see this sort of content, we’ll remove not only the users, but the users who are posting it. Participation in this forum is voluntary. Please remember that and review the guidelines before posting further:

http://halo.xbox.com/forums/p/services_agreement.aspx

Saying Halo should be kept a fond memory is like saying the same thing about Mario, Zelda, James Bond, etc. Sure it can’t always be the brightest star, but it should never be put out to pasture.

Also if it’s the gameplay turning people off of Halo, perhaps they should learn a thing or two about weapons. I’ll look at Call of Duty as an easy example. How is it that 500 years in the future, it’s unrealistic for a weapon to take 5 shots to get through shields and armor, yet in Call of Duty, which takes place in our current time, allows you to hit people several times with a .50 cal sniper rifle and they just keep running around. Yes, I know headshots get kills, but if you get shot with a .50 caliber anywhere but your fingers you will not be standing, end of story.

We haven’t seen the best or worst of Halo, there’s still a lot of story left in this franchise, and some other tricks to dish out. If Call of Duty can steal from Battlefield and be “innovative”, and Halo can steal from Tribes and have a “new gametype”, then there are still more things out there for Halo to do.

> Removed some content from this thread because it was inappropriate and against the guidelines. If we continue to see this sort of content, we’ll remove not only the users, but the users who are posting it. Participation in this forum is voluntary. Please remember that and review the guidelines before posting further:
>
> http://halo.xbox.com/forums/p/services_agreement.aspx

This is not meant to be aggressive, but you should have thought about the repercussions of shutting down the HaloWars Forums. Now all the trolls will be coming here.

Also, apparently Ethics is mobilizing -Yoink!- against you. I have no idea what -Yoink!- is, but the way Ethics puts it… well it’s unethical.

> > Removed some content from this thread because it was inappropriate and against the guidelines. If we continue to see this sort of content, we’ll remove not only the users, but the users who are posting it. Participation in this forum is voluntary. Please remember that and review the guidelines before posting further:
> >
> > http://halo.xbox.com/forums/p/services_agreement.aspx
>
> This is not meant to be aggressive, but you should have thought about the repercussions of shutting down the HaloWars Forums. Now all the trolls will be coming here.
>
> Also, apparently Ethics is mobilizing -Yoink!- against you. I have no idea what -Yoink!- is, but the way Ethics puts it… well it’s unethical.

One word: Banhammer.

Just with the interactions from the 343i people, if we extrapolate them we can really see that they’re a good company. Halo Wars had to go down… But they left the stats after listening to us. Now, all they have to do is keep it up and they will do more than a fine job. Bungie may have gone down a bit but dosen’t mean Halo will.

> Saying Halo should be kept a fond memory is like saying the same thing about Mario, Zelda, James Bond, etc. Sure it can’t always be the brightest star, but it should never be put out to pasture.
>
> Also if it’s the gameplay turning people off of Halo, perhaps they should learn a thing or two about weapons. I’ll look at Call of Duty as an easy example. How is it that 500 years in the future, it’s unrealistic for a weapon to take 5 shots to get through shields and armor, yet in Call of Duty, which takes place in our current time, allows you to hit people several times with a .50 cal sniper rifle and they just keep running around. Yes, I know headshots get kills, but if you get shot with a .50 caliber anywhere but your fingers you will not be standing, end of story.
>
> We haven’t seen the best or worst of Halo, there’s still a lot of story left in this franchise, and some other tricks to dish out. If Call of Duty can steal from Battlefield and be “innovative”, and Halo can steal from Tribes and have a “new gametype”, then there are still more things out there for Halo to do.

Like I said before, it isn’t really about the realism so much as the gameplay. I prefer to have someone die instantaenously when I shoot them because it means that whoever is set up strategically wins, and people who run into a room blindly are punished for their lack of foresight, no matter how good their aim might be. It does require less skill though. (By skill I mean just the ability to aim really well with the joysticks.) But I don’t care about skill as much as I do about tactics. The fun of an FPS for me is about setting myself up in a good place to ambush people or to cover a high traffic area at strategic positions. Some would call this camping, but I only consider hiding around a corner in a random part of the map camping. If you’re peering over a crate down a hall people should know not to just run into the hall without looking first, and they can figure out ways to flank you, use flashbangs, C4, etc.

But like I said, it’s all a matter of taste. If there continues to be a market for the Halo games, then they should keep making them. If the market decreases, then so should production. It may well be that Halo won’t be a AAA game forever, but if people are still willing to buy titles from a smaller studio then there’s still a buck to be made.

Halo, much like Call of Duty, are the perfect franchises right now. Half the population whines about it, while the other half is insanely devoted. If that is the reaction your product gets, you’re doing it right.

> Halo, much like Call of Duty, are the perfect franchises right now. Half the population whines about it, while the other half is insanely devoted. If that is the reaction your product gets, you’re doing it right.

Yup. As I’ve been saying all along, the two have such different gameplay that they’re practically two different Genres. I don’t know of too many people who would say, “Reach and Black Ops are too similar, I’m only going to buy one.” If there is a choice it’s over which style you favor, not over who does it better. They’re both doing two different things.

I won’t buy Black Ops because Treyarch has made crappy games in the past, and I don’t support Activision after what they did to IW. However, I don’t know that I could buy another IW game after how bad MW2’s multiplayer was.

The campaign for MW and MW2 was amazing, and a completely different type of experience from Halo. However, if I want a realistic shooter I’ll play Battlefield or America’s Army 3.

If there were ever a Halo: Avery Johnson game, I would want it to be more in the style of Call of Duty, with less Ramirez.

> I won’t buy Black Ops because Treyarch has made crappy games in the past, and I don’t support Activision after what they did to IW. However, I don’t know that I could buy another IW game after how bad MW2’s multiplayer was.
>
> The campaign for MW and MW2 was amazing, and a completely different type of experience from Halo. However, if I want a realistic shooter I’ll play Battlefield or America’s Army 3.
>
> If there were ever a Halo: Avery Johnson game, I would want it to be more in the style of Call of Duty, with less Ramirez.

Well… to not buy something because a company has made crappy games in the past doesn’t make that much sense. You can just rent it to see whether you like it. I can see your point about Activision though.

I agree about MW2’s multiplayer. It had great weapons, but the killstreak system should have still given everyone UAVs at three kills. Now no one uses them because everyone is holding out for the AC130. Not only that, but the spawns are just godawful. Every time I die it’s almost always because someone spawned behind me, and then after that I get spawn killed two or three times afterward. That’s one thing that Reach beats CoD at hands down. (Unless they did something to fix the spawns in Black Ops.)

Another issue is the insane amount of glitching, like getting a knife kill from across the map, or the countless ways to manipulate One Man Army.

Treyarch has always been a second rate studio to me, they’ve ridden IW’s coattails for years. I understand that they have a real chance to prove themselves now, but I think it’s too little and too late, especially if they stick with Activision. I hope Bungie got a hardcore awesome contract, otherwise they could face the same fate.

> Another issue is the insane amount of glitching, like getting a knife kill from across the map, or the countless ways to manipulate One Man Army.
>
> Treyarch has always been a second rate studio to me, they’ve ridden IW’s coattails for years. I understand that they have a real chance to prove themselves now, but I think it’s too little and too late, especially if they stick with Activision. I hope Bungie got a hardcore awesome contract, otherwise they could face the same fate.

To be fair, the new game is actually pretty decent. Glitching is down considerably and gameplay is pretty decent. They incorporate a lot of the same ideas that REACH incorporated in saving $$ to upgrade stuff, etc.

That said, there is a pretty big gap between sci-fi shooter and modern shooter, and each title is ultimately geared for its own niche. REACH is a deeper story, with more gut punches as it unfolds. REACH multiplayer is a lot more fun, imho, as well. It just feels like more fun… more focus on just going balls out, as compared to the campfests that some CoD games can be.

CoD is an arcade military shooter, even the developers will admit that, and that makes it fun on it’s own merit. However if I go the military route I go Battlefield. It’s the cream of the crop as far as military shooters go, especially with the Frostbite engine. I’ve been playing Battlefield since 1942 (the game, not the year silly), and I’ve not missed a single installment. All have been amazing.

Why must the next Halo game be a shooter at all? After all, Halo Wars did well as an RTS. Who’s to say that the next Halo game couldn’t be a Western RPG, in the style of Dragon Age? Or something else entirely?

Honestly, the reason I play Halo more than any other FPS is becuase you don’t die instantly. I hate a game of who sees who first. This is why I don’t play Battlefield, CoD, or any other FPS except Perfect Dark which can have shields too. In Halo, it is who out maneuvers who the best. That is also what keeps FPS Halo games original. Take that out, and it isn’t Halo. Halo 3 ODST didn’t have shields, but you didn’t die instantly either. If they made a mainstream Halo game with the ODST health style, it would still feel like Halo because you wouldn’t die instantly. That is also why I don’t play Swat or Snipers in Halo. Those two playlist feel like a generic FPS game.

> Honestly, the reason I play Halo more than any other FPS is becuase you don’t die instantly. I hate a game of who sees who first. This is why I don’t play Battlefield, CoD, or any other FPS except Perfect Dark which can have shields too. In Halo, it is who out maneuvers who the best. That is also what keeps FPS Halo games original. Take that out, and it isn’t Halo. Halo 3 ODST didn’t have shields, but you didn’t die instantly either. If they made a mainstream Halo game with the ODST health style, it would still feel like Halo because you wouldn’t die instantly. That is also why I don’t play Swat or Snipers in Halo. Those two playlist feel like a generic FPS game.

You and I are exact opposites. If you have great thumb dexterity play Halo. I kinda got fed up with perfect 4 shots and BXRs. A lot of the time it doesn’t matter how well you plan things out, it’s just a numbers game/who has the better weapons. Though on the flip side spawn killing isn’t nearly as much of a problem in Halo as it is in realistic shooters. A lot of the time in MW2 I’ll die three times in a row while only living 1/2 a second as the guy I spawn right in front of shoots me in the back. Nonsense.

I prefer the fact you can have little battles with your enemy on Halo. Dancing around each other with mid range weapons, or bouncing a frag just to follow up with the death shot is somthing I can’t get with COD.