It seems to me like 343 is leaning towards the idea that Reach was a success. You don’t see any evidence of them acknowledging that Bungie alienated players with the way they introduced new game mechanics. Not to mention that the Anniversary playlists do not play anything at all like Halo CE, which implies they think fans only care about the maps.And with the introduction of the new hotshot gametype, which completely alters the equal footing of players(almost in a killstreak-like manner), it seems like they don’t recognize or care about what made Halo competitive and successful in the past. Is there any statement made by 343 that verifies what their opinions about Reach are or whether they are taking a “classic approach” or not? Or are they going to use the failed logic that Bungie had when making Reach that making it more like CE meant adding drastically different gameplay mechanics?
oh man, it would be epic to see 343i make Halo 4 EXACTLY like Halo Reach.
The threads/comments in this forum will be fantastic based on what we already see without out knowing anything about Halo 4 lol…
I hope you won’t think me lazy if I simply copy and paste my reply to another thread:
> I’m amazed that there are still people on this forum who do not realise this one, simple fact:
>
> Halo: Reach was not part of the Halo trilogy; it was a spin-off, and thus its game mechanics did not need to be a faithful reflection of the mechanics found in the trilogy proper. Whilst Reach may be the direct predecessor of Halo 4 in a chronological sense, Halo 3 is its predecessor in terms of narrative and is likely therefore a more accurate indication of the tone and nature of Halo 4.
If it is anything like Reach, I’ll just buy for the Campaign.
It just seems like some of the things 343 employees have said, like “we’re looking at what CoD does and making it better” sounds a lot like the mentality that Bungie had when they were making Reach- looking at other games for innovation rather than using their own games as a source for innovation and improve upon the qualities that make Halo distinct.
And btw, customization options alone aren’t going to fix these problems. There needs to be less polarization of the Halo community.
> It just seems like some of the things 343 employees have said, like “we’re looking at what CoD does and making it better” sounds a lot like the mentality that Bungie had when they were making Reach
Did they really say something like that? I’ve never played a Call of Duty game precisely because the style of play doesn’t appeal to me at all.
> I hope you won’t think me lazy if I simply copy and paste my reply to another thread:
>
>
>
> > I’m amazed that there are still people on this forum who do not realise this one, simple fact:
> >
> > Halo: Reach was not part of the Halo trilogy; it was a spin-off, and thus its game mechanics did not need to be a faithful reflection of the mechanics found in the trilogy proper. Whilst Reach may be the direct predecessor of Halo 4 in a chronological sense, Halo 3 is its predecessor in terms of narrative and is likely therefore a more accurate indication of the tone and nature of Halo 4.
That’s a bit of a stretch…One could easily say because Halo 4 is the start of the new trilogy that it doesn’t need to follow the same as the old one (which I hope it doesn’t). To say the narrative to the same is counter to what the new trilogy is as we already know new weapons will in fact exist and that the narrative will be much different from the first trilogy as we explore more into the Forerunner then ever before.
If 343 thought halo reach was a complete success they would not of made the TU they would not of made anniversary playlist they wouldn’t be changing the gameplay every month i.e. removing friendly fire from living dead. they read these forums they know reach annoys people and all they are trying to do is make it as fun as possible and fix as much as they can. I would rather them do that then say reach was bad we are not even going to touch it. 343 is probably not going to make halo 4 like reach i doubt it will even play exactly like halo 3. this is 343’s first BIG title game there not going to empress anybody backpacking off older games. I have high hopes that 343 is not going to screw over the legacy that is halo.
> That’s a bit of a stretch…One could easily say because Halo 4 is the start of the new trilogy that it doesn’t need to follow the same as the old one (which I hope it doesn’t). To say the narrative to the same is counter to what the new trilogy is as we already know new weapons will in fact exist and that the narrative will be much different from the first trilogy as we explore more into the Forerunner then ever before.
I don’t think you understood my post, especially if you think that having the same weapons and the same plot as Halo 3 is what I meant by Halo 4 following on from Halo 3. I was implying that Halo 4 would likely take its cues from Halo 3 rather than Reach, not recapitulate everything that Halo 3 incorporated. If you think of the first trilogy as a straight road, then I’m proposing that Halo Wars, ODST, and Reach are side-streets coming off that road, and that Halo 4 will be the first game since Halo 3 to continue along the main road. Thus, I think it’s far more likely that 343 Industries examined Halo 3 in more detail than they did Reach, as they tried to determine a suitable tone for Halo 4.
Your talking complete utter nonsense. Nothing you’ve said has really stated facts. I don’t see how you think 343 is leaning towards reach style, it’s merely your opinion pulled straight from thin air.
Come with more evidence please, or something to support your thought.
> Your talking complete utter nonsense. Nothing you’ve said has really stated facts. I don’t see how you think 343 is leaning towards reach style, it’s merely your opinion pulled straight from thin air.
>
> Come with more evidence please, or something to support your thought.
Is that directed at me?
> > Your talking complete utter nonsense. Nothing you’ve said has really stated facts. I don’t see how you think 343 is leaning towards reach style, it’s merely your opinion pulled straight from thin air.
> >
> > Come with more evidence please, or something to support your thought.
>
> Is that directed at me?
No lol op xD.
> No lol op xD.
I was about to say: I’m arguing exactly the opposite.
> If it is anything like Reach, I’ll just buy for the Campaign.
If it’s anything like Reach, the campaign will be horrible.
> It just seems like some of the things 343 employees have said, like “we’re looking at what CoD does and making it better” sounds a lot like the mentality that Bungie had when they were making Reach- looking at other games for innovation rather than using their own games as a source for innovation and improve upon the qualities that make Halo distinct.
>
> And btw, customization options alone aren’t going to fix these problems. There needs to be less polarization of the Halo community.
OP can you please point out a bulletin or post or anything were 343 says there going to make halo 4 play like a better version of COD. because I don’t mean to call you out but you are making assumptions on game we know next to nothing about I understand speculation and rumors and those are fine but please don’t clame 343 is doing something they are not
343 qouted “were taking halo back to its roots” thus meaning it should be more like halo ce,2 and 3 and not in the direction of reach
If they make it like Reach they must be on some type of hallucinogen. B/c that will just ruin everything. Reach was nothing but a disappointment.
lol people never know what they want.
halo 2 comes out: “wish it was like CE waaaaah”
halo 3 comes out: “waaah 2 was much better.”
halo reach comes out: “Halo 3 was the bawls, halo reach is so -Yoink-.”
my prediction for halo 4 stands obvious. it’s not cool to hate the latest game out ya know.
i love reachs multiplayer much better than any of the past halos, im not scared to say it. but im sure when halo 4 comes out you’ll all magically love reach.
Uh, Reach was a success.
> lol people never know what they want.
>
> halo 2 comes out: “wish it was like CE waaaaah”
> halo 3 comes out: “waaah 2 was much better.”
> halo reach comes out: “Halo 3 was the bawls, halo reach is so Yoink!.”
I’ve posted this same sentiment on several previous occasions (albiet with slightly different wording). There has been a backlash to each and every Halo title in turn (even to Combat Evolved to some extent), and people continue to be as fickle today as they were ten years ago.