> With that said, 343 should quit listening to the members of the fan base who cannot accept change. They are the reason there is no dlc in matchmaking and they caused the removal of dominion.
What?
DLC maps ARE in Matchmaking, there is just no playlist for them exclusively, because the low population would make search times unbearable and matches would lag more often. Dominion was removed for similar reasons.
> They also made them implement small, stale, and symmetrical forge maps.
What?
When Halo 4 launched, there were only 10 maps (3 forge maps). 4 small maps, 6 medium-large maps. Forge maps had to be included.
> They are devolving halo and 343 should stop listening to them. The only criteria they have for a halo game is that it should exactly like Ce, H2 , or H3.
What?
Any Halo player since Halo CE KNOWS each game has been different enough to warrant a new game. (Halo 2 and 3 were the most similar games).
> The problem with this is halo needed to change its game play. H4 was a step in the right direction, but they need to go the extra mile with halo 5. They should try and implement some of the ambitious ideas that Ryan Payton had in mind for H4 into h5. From what I’ve gathered Payton’s h4 vision wouldn’t have been that much different story wise, but the game play he had in mind probably included things like destructible environments, rpg elements, more stealth elements, dead space like low gravity thruster combat, and more open environments. (This is speculation I’m basing off of the two versions of the initial teaser trailer and some interviews with Frank)
What?
Halo 4 added to much, to fast, and did not test if it would work in a Halo game. Fully customized load-outs in Halo 4 are a joke, with a 1 shot-kill weapon and long range weapons, and with perks that take away base player traits we had in previous games.
They removed Descope for no reason and was replaced by Flinch, which completely messed with how long-range engagements played out, and made the Sniper Rifle even more OP at range.
Sprint is still debatable.
Ryan Payton’s Halo 4 probably would’ve killed off the series. It would be yet another game on the market that tries to copy all the big games, has no identity, fails terribly, and is mocked and laughed at by fans and non-fans of the series.
> Halo fans need to ignore the notion that halo is moon jumpy gameplay on small symmetrical maps with small amounts of weapons.
What?
To ignore that, you ignore Halo itself.
Halo is known best for 2 things. The Campaign, and small-scale competitive Multiplayer.
It is also known to try and balance the weapon sandbox, reducing weapon clones that Modern FPS’s are known for. Each weapon is unique, and not a carbon copy.
> Halo is a vast sci-fi universe that weaves its way through books and games and h4 takes arcs from the previous trilogy and novels to exciting new places. In this universe, there are stealthy and strong super soldiers that can run 60km/h.
Don’t forget the TV series soon.
> My point is, the gameplay should not be limited by the arena gamer ideals. For H5 here should be at least 64 players in MP, destructible environments, massive maps, even more realistic physics.
Now you are just looking for Battlefield: Halo, NOT Halo 5. Halo does not need 64 players, 24-32 would be efficient.
Destructible environments would be a nice addition, and has actually been in a Halo game before. Halo 2.
Massive maps would indeed need to be a priority, since with the Xbox One, 343 can add more players and vehicles, and they have a LOT more power to use.
Realistic physics… ehhhhh. For vehicles, sure. But nobody dare touch the ragdoll physics of dead bodies.