343, Learn From Bungie’s Mistakes: Make Halo 4 FAMILIAR

Games Other Halo
1

First off, I’d like to say I personally enjoy Reach. I think as long as Halo sticks loosely to its original formula I will enjoy it. However, I’ve noticed that many people have been turned off Reach because of its different gameplay mechanics. Reach, arguably, was the Halo game that went off on the largest tangent from the “Halo formula” (An exact definition of this is debatable).

I will start by saying that Reach’s willingness to be different was not a bad thing. However, I think Bungie either went a bit to far with different mechanics or just went in the wrong direction. With Halo 4, I think what 343 needs to do is be conservative (I love emphasizing things :stuck_out_tongue: ). By all means add some new features, but do not go too far. Halo 4 is the game that people will pretty much judge 343s future on.

Things I think 343 should do:

Keep All The Base Sandbox Weapons:
That is, the Assault Rifle, Plasma Rifle, Magnum, Rockets, Plasma Pistol, Shotgun, Sniper rifle AND:

I would recommend including the Battle Rifle as the Halo 4’s main precision weapon as well as including the SMG along with the ability to dual wield. I believe this will help to recapture the Halo 2/3 fanbase which seems to be where the Halo franchise picked up a lot of its fans (I have no solid figures for this, this is just an observation).

Visual Consistency:
Be conservative with item and environment design. Maybe less so with environment (considering Halo 4 has been claimed to be exploratory like Halo: CE) but at least keep the Forerunner visual style.

With items, I feel the assault rifle should stick to it’s Halo: CE/Halo 3 design for familiarity. Also, I hope the warthog in Forza 4 is not what the ‘hog looks like in Halo 4 (it probably will be unfortunately). The warthog has stayed the same throughout the Halo series with the exception of an upgraded polygon count/textures.

Gameplay consistency:
The big one. Keep similar kill times to Halos 1-3, keep similar jump heights, movement speeds, aim and movement acceleration. This is the one thing where I feel Reach went most wrong: movement was nerfed to compensate for armour abilities.

I probably haven’t been as detailed and in-depth as I should have been but this is just a basic summary of my feelings towards what Halo 4 should be. This is, of course, all just my opinion, feel free to disagree or share your thoughts.

2

Bungie made a mistake? When?

Also it sounds like you want a lot pulled from previous games without even considering new features. I’m not sure I agree with that.

3

Nice post. I like that you fair-minded about Halo: Reach, even though you’d like Halo 4 to return to a more “classic feel.” If only more fans were as level-headed as you, these forums might be less of a firestorm.

Anyway, I’d rather have Halo 4 feel new. I don’t want to buy two remakes of Halo CE two years in a row. Don’t get me wrong, it should still play and feel like a Halo game. That doesn’t mean throwing away everything Reach brought to the table, though.

After all, combat does evolve.

4

I agree on making it somewhat the same, less away from Reach, but the whole “precision weapon, one shot/burst” argument of having it in a Halo game is old now. You can have a spraying weapon, but punish the players for spamming it if you want it accurate, not like the assault rifle accuracy in Reach, better, but more or less the same. There’s no real reason for us to be in the future using weapons we can’t spam.

5

TBH, if you’re actually familiar with Halo, Reach is closer in feel to Halo 1 than any of the other Halo games. Despite all the additions.

People are gonna get a BIG shock on Tuesday if they think Halo 1 played like Halo 3…

6

> Bungie made a mistake? When?

By not giving us any mountable Moa to rain machine gun death down upon our foes. This was Bungie’s greatest error and there will be retribution…once i found the TV remote that is.

7

Please, if Halo 4 is a mess like Reach I don’t know what I will do. Bring back the Halo 2/3 mechanics. No AA’s, not even sprint.

8

> Bungie made a mistake? When?

LOL

9

> Nice post. I like that you fair-minded about Halo: Reach, even though you’d like Halo 4 to return to a more “classic feel.” If only more fans were as level-headed as you, these forums might be less of a firestorm.
>
> Anyway, I’d rather have Halo 4 feel new. I don’t want to buy two remakes of Halo CE two years in a row. Don’t get me wrong, it should still play and feel like a Halo game. That doesn’t mean throwing away everything Reach brought to the table, though.
>
> After all, combat does evolve.

halo reach didnt ‘evolve’ anything. it DEVOLVED halo. period.

10

> TBH, if you’re actually familiar with Halo, Reach is closer in feel to Halo 1 than any of the other Halo games. Despite all the additions.
>
> People are gonna get a BIG shock on Tuesday if they think Halo 1 played like Halo 3…

Haha, it’s true.

11

> > Nice post. I like that you fair-minded about Halo: Reach, even though you’d like Halo 4 to return to a more “classic feel.” If only more fans were as level-headed as you, these forums might be less of a firestorm.
> >
> > Anyway, I’d rather have Halo 4 feel new. I don’t want to buy two remakes of Halo CE two years in a row. Don’t get me wrong, it should still play and feel like a Halo game. That doesn’t mean throwing away everything Reach brought to the table, though.
> >
> > After all, combat does evolve.
>
> halo reach didnt ‘evolve’ anything. it DEVOLVED halo. period.

Um, I was talking about Halo 4 “evolving.” How does saying that “not everything Halo: Reach did is terrible” automatically mean that I think it’s the end all, be all of competitive game design? Just because Halo: Reach tried some new things that the majority of longtime fans didn’t end up liking, doesn’t mean the series should stop trying new things and become stagnant. Nowhere did I state that I want a game that is more like Halo: Reach than the original trilogy.

Once again URZA, you have misunderstood me.

12

Every single Halo game released to date has felt really familiar.

13

> > > Nice post. I like that you fair-minded about Halo: Reach, even though you’d like Halo 4 to return to a more “classic feel.” If only more fans were as level-headed as you, these forums might be less of a firestorm.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I’d rather have Halo 4 feel new. I don’t want to buy two remakes of Halo CE two years in a row. Don’t get me wrong, it should still play and feel like a Halo game. That doesn’t mean throwing away everything Reach brought to the table, though.
> > >
> > > After all, combat does evolve.
> >
> > halo reach didnt ‘evolve’ anything. it DEVOLVED halo. period.
>
> Um, I was talking about Halo 4 “evolving.” How does saying that “not everything Halo: Reach did is terrible” automatically mean that I think it’s the end all, be all of competitive game design? Just because Halo: Reach tried some new things that the majority of longtime fans didn’t end up liking, doesn’t mean the series should stop trying new things and become stagnant. Nowhere did I state that I want a game that’s more like Halo: Reach than the original trilogy.
>
> Once again URZA, you have misunderstood me.

i thought you were saying halo reach was evolved halo (in any way, shape, or form, as far as mechanics go). my goodness bro! i almost busted a lung from laughter at that.

glad were on the same page now. lolz

14

> > > > Nice post. I like that you fair-minded about Halo: Reach, even though you’d like Halo 4 to return to a more “classic feel.” If only more fans were as level-headed as you, these forums might be less of a firestorm.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, I’d rather have Halo 4 feel new. I don’t want to buy two remakes of Halo CE two years in a row. Don’t get me wrong, it should still play and feel like a Halo game. That doesn’t mean throwing away everything Reach brought to the table, though.
> > > >
> > > > After all, combat does evolve.
> > >
> > > halo reach didnt ‘evolve’ anything. it DEVOLVED halo. period.
> >
> > Um, I was talking about Halo 4 “evolving.” How does saying that “not everything Halo: Reach did is terrible” automatically mean that I think it’s the end all, be all of competitive game design? Just because Halo: Reach tried some new things that the majority of longtime fans didn’t end up liking, doesn’t mean the series should stop trying new things and become stagnant. Nowhere did I state that I want a game that’s more like Halo: Reach than the original trilogy.
> >
> > Once again URZA, you have misunderstood me.
>
> i thought you were saying halo reach was evolved halo (in any way, shape, or form, as far as mechanics go). my goodness bro! i almost busted a lung from laughter at that.
>
> glad were on the same page now. lolz

We are. I know you really dislike Halo: Reach, and you know I think it’s solid but pretty different. We both want Halo 4 to be better and love the original trilogy.

15

All I’m going to say is PLEASE keep bloom out. I truly feel like the crosshairs in Halo are what make it so fun. Don’t mess with them like they did with Reach.

16

Couldn’t agree with this more.

17

> All I’m going to say is PLEASE keep bloom out. I truly feel like the crosshairs in Halo are what make it so fun. Don’t mess with them like they did with Reach.

Agreed.

18

I would perfer several good, detailed, unique maps, instead of one crappy bland map that’s just crap pasted together.
(I’m talking about how Forge World replaced accurate remakes of Blood Gulch)

19

> TBH, if you’re actually familiar with Halo, Reach is closer in feel to Halo 1 than any of the other Halo games. Despite all the additions.

Hardly.

20

> > TBH, if you’re actually familiar with Halo, Reach is closer in feel to Halo 1 than any of the other Halo games. Despite all the additions.
>
> Hardly.

If you strip away bloom and AAs (which do have a huge impact on gameplay,) this is actually true. Play the anniversary playlists and you’ll see. It feels considerably more like Halo CE’s multiplayer than Halo 2 or 3 did.

(And no, I’m not trying to say Halo: Reach’s multiplayer is better than Halo 2 or 3’s.)