"A house divided cannot stand" (TL;DR included)

Games Other Halo
1

Mark 3:25, also used by Abraham Lincoln in one of his speeches.

My point is, we need to stop arguing. Perks, new armor, Competitive v Casual, Sprint, BR v DMR, everything. Its tearing us apart.

Now I know, some of you just want what you think is best for Halo. But at this moment, what I think is best for Halo is that we unite, and not continue this rivalry. At this moment, Halo 4 is too far into production for any of our opinions to be taken into consideration. Maybe minor things, but the core gameplay elements 343 is adding/changing cannot be changed.

We need to remember that Halo is built on innovation and change, not “dont fix what aint broke”.

Halo CE: shields, 2-weapons only, overshields, etc.
Halo 2: Dual-wielding, automatic health regeneration, new armor
Halo 3: equipment, new armor (sort of), new ranking, etc.
Halo Reach: AAs, new armor, new ranking, removal of dual-wield, etc
Halo 4: “perks”, sprint, new armor, etc

Now I’ll admit. Reach wasn’t perfect. I’ll even go so far as to say, Halo 4 won’t be perfect. Guaranteed. What game is? The important thing is that we need to stop aruging, and give 343 a chance. Discussion is one thing, but childish bickering and whining is another.

TL;DR: Stop fighting. Halo is built on innovation/change.

2

At least half of the playlists have to be geared towards competitive, or at least semi-competitive players.

Reach lost maybe the majority of its players (Bungie Day 08’, Halo 3, 300,000 players on at a moment, Bungie Day 11’, <100k players. Keep in mind that last Bungie day, they were giving out steaks.), and people don’t understand that if Halo 4 flops, it will never gain those competitive players back.

I say if 343 gives us anything even comparable to Reach, this franchise is doomed to a slow, painful death. A death where Fifa games have a higher online population.

If you ask me, 343s priority has to be to gain back loyal fans that felt betrayed with Reach. They have to give casuals and competitive players a game that they can all enjoy.

3

It’s the type of innovation/change brought in that makes people argue. Humans are humans, we will never stop fighting.

As our enemies have found we can reason like men, so now let us show them we can fight like men also. -Thomas Jefferson

4

> At least half of the playlists have to be geared towards competitive, or at least semi-competitive players.
>
> Reach lost maybe the majority of its players (Bungie Day 08’, Halo 3, 300,000 players on at a moment, Bungie Day 11’, <100k players. Keep in mind that last Bungie day, they were giving out steaks.), and people don’t understand that if Halo 4 flops, it will never gain those competitive players back.
>
> I say if 343 gives us anything even comparable to Reach, this franchise is doomed to a slow, painful death. A death where Fifa games have a higher online population.
>
>
>
> If you ask me, 343s priority has to be to gain back loyal fans that felt betrayed with Reach. They have to give casuals and competitive players a game that they can all enjoy.

I agree. And we need the 1-50 back.

5

> > At least half of the playlists have to be geared towards competitive, or at least semi-competitive players.
> >
> > Reach lost maybe the majority of its players (Bungie Day 08’, Halo 3, 300,000 players on at a moment, Bungie Day 11’, <100k players. Keep in mind that last Bungie day, they were giving out steaks.), and people don’t understand that if Halo 4 flops, it will never gain those competitive players back.
> >
> > I say if 343 gives us anything even comparable to Reach, this franchise is doomed to a slow, painful death. A death where Fifa games have a higher online population.
> >
> >
> >
> > If you ask me, 343s priority has to be to gain back loyal fans that felt betrayed with Reach. They have to give casuals and competitive players a game that they can all enjoy.
>
> I agree. And we need the 1-50 back.

See? This is good, solid discussion. We need more of this. We need to stop the bickering.

6

> And we need the 1-50 back.

No we don’t.

Want =/= Need.

And Arena is better.

> At least half of the playlists have to be geared towards competitive, or at least semi-competitive players.
>
> Reach lost maybe the majority of its players (Bungie Day 08’, Halo 3, 300,000 players on at a moment, Bungie Day 11’, <100k players. Keep in mind that last Bungie day, they were giving out steaks.), and people don’t understand that if Halo 4 flops, it will never gain those competitive players back.
>
> I say if 343 gives us anything even comparable to Reach, this franchise is doomed to a slow, painful death. A death where Fifa games have a higher online population.
>
> If you ask me, 343s priority has to be to gain back loyal fans that felt betrayed with Reach. They have to give casuals and competitive players a game that they can all enjoy.

And how many people will that bring back?

You’re implying that if 343 makes H4 a competitive player paradise that it’ll regain 200k players that Reach “lost?” I refuse to believe that.

And if H3 was a competitive Halo, even if a lesser one than other titles, then why did it loose the bulk of it’s population to MW2? A more casual game?

7

> > And we need the 1-50 back.
>
> No we don’t.
>
> And Arena is better.

Yes, we do. Most of the “matches” on Reach are tremendously one-sided, and Arena is just as bad.

From another thread:

> I used to a little but the matches seemed off. We would either trounce the other team or get trounced upon. I know that happens in TS as well but it seemed epidemic in Arena. I also think it needs a larger player pool to work the way it was intened. I think there was alot to work with but it needs work. I just felt like it never really got it unfortunately. :frowning:

8

> > And we need the 1-50 back.
>
> No we don’t.
>
> And Arena is better.

If it was better, people would actually play it, and they don’t. What we need is a 1-50 system that works properly: no boosting, no skill plateauing/multi-accounts.

9

> Yes, we do. Most of the “matches” on Reach are tremendously one-sided, and Arena is just as bad.

H3 had better matches not because your TrueSkill rank was visible but because of the TrueSkill restrictions placed upon it for creating games were stricter by default. The visibility of your TrueSkill rank has no bearing on how accurate TrueSkill matches actually are.

10

> If it was better, people would actually play it, and they don’t.

Because it started off with the Rating System and actual changes to make it more competitive rather than default Team Slayer with a different ranking system were slow to materalize. This killed off player interest and the waning population and the inherit lack of quality matches that comes from a low population killed off the rest. It got stuck in a vicious circle.

11

We all don’t have to want the same things. I think the forums would get pretty boring really quick if that were the case. We just have to not take things so personally. We all want this game to be the best it can be. That desire will of course bring out passionate responses from the community. I think it’s awesome that so many people love a game that I hold dear to my heart.

12

The game should just take more skill. Halo 3 took skill IMO. It wasn’t just credit boosting your way up to the top, you actually leveled through winning, as a team. cR should be taken out, and Halo 3’s leveling system, or something similar should take its place. Also, I liked the fact that achievements earned you armor. Forgive me for a CoD comparison, but it’s like how Black Ops made you pay for weapons after you earned the rank.

I’m sick of hearing “Oh, you guys just want the old Halo! Go back to Halo 2 or 3, we need change!”, Halo doesn’t need a change, at least not an extremely major one. The gameplay in Halo 2 and 3 were phenomenal. If 343i pulls some elements from those games, we’ll be in great shape.

13

Halo 3 was perfect <3

Some might say imperfectly perfect, which that is OK too, but I say that anything less from this feeling of perfection that we experienced before will be a disappointment :frowning:

14

> We all don’t have to want the same things. I think the forums would get pretty boring really quick if that were the case. We just have to not take things so personally. We all want this game to be the best it can be. That desire will of course bring out passionate responses from the community. I think it’s awesome that so many people love a game that I hold dear to my heart.

Oh I’m not saying we all need to want the same things. I just think we need to stop the whining and bickering, and take part in civilized, constuctive discussion and debate.

15

> > And we need the 1-50 back.
>
> No we don’t.
>
> Want =/= Need.
>
> And Arena is better.
>
>
>
> > At least half of the playlists have to be geared towards competitive, or at least semi-competitive players.
> >
> > Reach lost maybe the majority of its players (Bungie Day 08’, Halo 3, 300,000 players on at a moment, Bungie Day 11’, <100k players. Keep in mind that last Bungie day, they were giving out steaks.), and people don’t understand that if Halo 4 flops, it will never gain those competitive players back.
> >
> > I say if 343 gives us anything even comparable to Reach, this franchise is doomed to a slow, painful death. A death where Fifa games have a higher online population.
> >
> > If you ask me, 343s priority has to be to gain back loyal fans that felt betrayed with Reach. They have to give casuals and competitive players a game that they can all enjoy.
>
> And how many people will that bring back?
>
> You’re implying that if 343 makes H4 a competitive player paradise that it’ll regain 200k players that Reach “lost?” I refuse to believe that.
>
> And if H3 was a competitive Halo, even if a lesser one than other titles, then why did it loose the bulk of it’s population to MW2? A more casual game?

Are you saying that even if it won’t give us that full 200k population back, we shouldn’t do it to gain some of the population back, and ultimately make the game more successful?

16

> > We all don’t have to want the same things. I think the forums would get pretty boring really quick if that were the case. We just have to not take things so personally. We all want this game to be the best it can be. That desire will of course bring out passionate responses from the community. I think it’s awesome that so many people love a game that I hold dear to my heart.
>
> Oh I’m not saying we all need to want the same things. I just think we need to stop the <mark>whining and bickering</mark>, and take part in civilized, constuctive discussion and debate.

One man’s whining and bickering is another man’s civilized debate. It is the nature of the beast.

17

> Are you saying that even if it won’t give us that full 200k population back, we shouldn’t do it to gain some of the population back, and ultimately make the game more successful?

Gains - Cost = ?

How many people are we going to bring back at the cost of alienating others currently playing?

And all of this is still under the false impression that population is the end all stat for measuring the quality of a game.

18

> > Are you saying that even if it won’t give us that full 200k population back, we shouldn’t do it to gain some of the population back, and ultimately make the game more successful?
>
> Gains - Cost
>
> How many people are we going to bring back at the cost of alienating others currently playing?

Alienating who, though? The casual community will play this game. Things such as sprint aren’t important to them. They aren’t game-changers.

If 343 managed to give 4-5 truly competitive, classic Halo playlists, then we’d stand a much better chance.

19

> Alienating who, though? The casual community will play this game. Things such as sprint aren’t important to them. They aren’t game-changers.
>
> If 343 managed to give 4-5 truly competitive, classic Halo playlists, then we’d stand a much better chance.

The true casuals moved on already, to CoD.

And what you’re saying comes off as “Everyone but me and those who think like me are a bunch of idiots. So not only do they not matter but their opinion does not count. Besides they won’t care anyway because they are morons, we could shovel them dog -Yoink- and they would love it. So in that case the game should be catered to me and those who think like me.”

20

> At least half of the playlists have to be geared towards competitive, or at least semi-competitive players.
>
> Reach lost maybe the majority of its players (Bungie Day 08’, <mark>Halo 3, 300,000 players on at a moment, Bungie Day 11’, <100k players</mark>. Keep in mind that last Bungie day, they were giving out steaks.), and people don’t understand that if Halo 4 flops, it will never gain those competitive players back.
>
> I say if 343 gives us anything even comparable to Reach, this franchise is doomed to a slow, painful death. A death where Fifa games have a higher online population.
>
>
>
> If you ask me, 343s priority has to be to gain back loyal fans that felt betrayed with Reach. They have to give casuals and competitive players a game that they can all enjoy.

Am I the only person on here who seen Bungie state on Bungi.net that H3’s population counter was based on a 24 hour timespan, while Reach’s was based on the number of players at the time of viewing? If only I could find the source