I know halo 4 and reach have caused division in the player base and everyone is entitled to their opinion but can we just ask our selves one thing how would bungie make halo 4.
This question has been biting at me for a few months and I just had to ask it because frankly the changes are drastic and I wonder how bungie would make halo 4.
Remember when Bethesda took over fall out how fall out 3 changed genres entirely don’t get me wrong it was still fun but some of the player base left while new one went in as is the natural order but if the new coming in and old going out is in misproportion a rift is created between new and old and the company that makes the game and occasionally the series dies out and that variable is increased when the it is made by a different company.
I know 343 needs to make a few games before they can be more accurately estimated but I am just saying that me and maybe a few other loyal seventh column members were at least a little worried at the change of hands and the future of the halo series but halo 4 may be the deciding factor in where halo will go.
maybe this sums it up
Clowns to the left of me jokers to the right here I am stuck in the middle with you.
Well judging from the campaign and how 343i has showed that they are going to go in more detail within the universe. Seeing as the 6 books being released in the Forerunner Saga and After War saga will be giving more into the triolgy. My question is are you only focusing on multiplayer in this discussion and ignoring campaign.
I read all the books and I am not talking about the campaign because in my opinion they will probably make the story just as amazing as most previous halos campaigns are, and I want to be surprised so I am not asking to many questions about it.
This isn’t the 7th column. This is the reclaimers.
And Bungie did not want to do halo anymore it seems.
So they would have likely abandoned halo.
> I read all the books and I am not talking about the campaign because in my opinion they will probably make the story just as amazing as most previous halos campaigns are, and I want to be surprised so I am not asking to many questions about it.
The way I look at is if they are treating the campaign good then thats all that matters, In the long run matchmaking in halo games slow down and die when new one come out. As long as it has an awesome campaign and fun Local/Lan multilayer the game is good to me. Call me old fashion but I judge these games more like classic games weather its Mario or Sonic you can play those games 20 years later and still enjoy them, though they did not have online play where as halo does but seeing from the first halo on now halo 2 what matters in re playability is everything beside matchmaking. I am a fan of series and to me in the long run trying to focus concern on matchmaking is pointless these games are awesome due to everything else. Now with all the new additions there will probably be a classic playlist but just give them a chance. If you have concerns still then that its best to bring them up during halo 5, give 343i a chance first.
> This isn’t the 7th column. <mark>This is the reclaimers.</mark>
>
> And Bungie did not want to do halo anymore it seems.
> So they would have likely abandoned halo.
If you are going to give us a name, at least make it not sound horrible.
> This line sums it up.
You blame the Covenant? >:(
Just kidding
okay instead of reclaimers what about the old shield.
> > This line sums it up.
>
> You blame the Covenant? >:(
>
> Just kidding
Elites ruined Rush.
Personally, I think Bungie would screw us over more than they did with Reach, if they were making Halo 4.
It seems like 343 has been putting a lot of work into this project. They have some of the most talented people in the gaming industry working on this one game, and they’ve already spent almost four years trying to make it the best it can be.
I have confidence the Reclaimer Trilogy, and I can’t wait to see fully what 343 has made for us.
> > > This line sums it up.
> >
> > You blame the Covenant? >:(
> >
> > Just kidding
>
> Elites ruined Rush.
I found that hillarious. Don’t know why
I blamed Microsoft for rushing reach given another year and the story may have been less mundane and we would have saber multiplayer.
As for 343 I can never read a post about halo 4 from them where a part of my mind goes wait this doesn’t sound like halo.
Lets just say worst case scenario halo 4 turns into something other than halo I get a refund and then just stop gaming all together (mass effect 3 and cod influence started me down that road).
But at least I still have halo 3 to play online with my friends if this game flops which I hope doesn’t happen but wait and see.
…I like Reach and I feel alone right now :’(. I think Bungie would have expanded on Reach personally, it seems they wanted Halo to have a darker tone (judging by ODST and Reach) So it probably would have been a really dark game (and still is according to 343)
Halo is dark in some areas before odst did you play 343 guilty spark the build up to the flood the first time you see them I know some people had to buy new under wear after that level.
I tried to play the first cod and the first level all those soldiers missing limbs and the corpse pile yew I decided after that darker is not always better.
This isn’t the Seventh Column. This is… the Pathfinders.
OT: They’d make the campaign difficulty a joke.
I hope to God turning on/off skulls in H4 doesn’t restart the mission. This was implemented in H3, when campaign scoring was introduced. Coincidence? Nope.
In H2, I could turn on/off skulls whenever I wanted. Really convenient.
With H3, I had to make several variant AI battles of the same game save to play what I wanted (balanced AI with just Thunderstorm on, competent AI with Tough Luck on, crazy AI with Catch on, kamikaze AI with Catch, Famine, and Thunderstorm on, badass AI battle with Thunderstorm, Mythic, Tough Luck, and Tilt on).
<mark>If Bungie were in charge, they’d only regard difficulty and luck. The campaign gameplay of H3 and Reach easily reflect this. No fun, no immersion, no replayability, no creativity.</mark>
Halo 4 is nigh, and those who don’t want to accept it, will be left behind.
> This isn’t the Seventh Column. This is… the Pathfinders.
>
> OT: They’d make the campaign difficulty a joke.
>
> I hope to God turning on/off skulls in H4 doesn’t restart the mission. This was implemented in H3, when campaign scoring was introduced. Coincidence? Nope.
>
> In H2, I could turn on/off skulls whenever I wanted. Really convenient.
>
> With H3, I had to make several variant AI battles of the same game save to play what I wanted (balanced AI with just Thunderstorm on, competent AI with Tough Luck on, crazy AI with Catch on, kamikaze AI with Catch, Famine, and Thunderstorm on, badass AI battle with Thunderstorm, Mythic, Tough Luck, and Tilt on).
>
> If Bungie were in charge, they’d only regard difficulty and luck. The campaign gameplay of <mark>H3</mark> and Reach easily reflect this. No fun, no immersion, no replayability, no creativity.
God, what is with the hate for Halo 3? I went back and played The Storm and Floodgate today, it’s extremely enjoyable to play! It ranks right beside CE, though if I had to choose which I’d rather play, it’d be Halo 3 because of its personality and Campaign content. And I started with CE back in 2003.
If anything, Halo 2 deserves the hate for its bullet sponge Brutes, bullet sponge Flood, bland art style, impossibly precise Jackal snipers, and horrible Arbiter levels (save for his first level). The later half of this game is just horrendous.
This is all coming from me recently having a playthrough of the Halo trilogy in order.
Can’t really answer this question because they wouldn’t ever make it. they wanted to be done with halo.
I feel that 343i has a better and deeper grasp on the story of Halo and that’s what I’m most excited for.
Reach could have been so much better, but the writers and narrative directors didn’t really see the game to its fullest potential. This is one area I feel and hope that 343i excels in.