Ive spent a lot of time reading through the fiction portion of the forums and accumulating the idea that many people believe that the Halo series declined from CE.
The difference between CE and the other Halo’s is that it wasnt ‘focused’ on multiplayer.
I am aware that the PC version had MP. I played it many a time and found it to be a brilliant experience.
So my question to the general public is;
-Did multiplayer take too much away from the general cannon and glory of the Halo series?
My thoughts: of course not. It was the communities fault for becoming so competitive and wanting the developers to focus on the features of multiplayer instead of the overall game.
Funny enough, the multiplayer was also better the less time they spent on it as they didnt overthink it, they kept it simple. And yes, the campaign has digressed in recent years , but I think that has to due with them spending too much time on features and trying to keep with the times. The campaign definitely needs the most time spent on it so the story and Canon are properly followed and are enticing. Theres more opportunity to add depth in campaign then multiplayer so they should spend more time there.
In all honesty, it’s not just halo but the ENITRE industry of FPS’s are getting focused on MP. as for halo thats not the case with canon getting broken, thats just bungie being lazy and trying to create a story as easy as possible with no regard to the books, which seems even more lazy when you consider ensamble payed attention to the books when they did halo wars.
all I can say is that they need to start focusing more on a campaign that will really wow people in halo 4, I mean thats what made halo succesfull is the campaign and universe, but with reach we saw that idea go down the toilet with a horrible story and characters you dont even like, I much prefered the ones in halo wars and ODST to the ones in REACH. so if they make an amazeing campaign halo will be restored to it’s former glory
Bungie didn’t make mistakes at all. That is why Halo: CE and Halo 2 are amazing games, Microsoft was pressuring them and Bungie wanted to do things on there terms.
That’s why I fear for Halo 4. Microsoft better sit back and let 343i do their job with 100% creativity.
I think I found something. Something important.
I was playing resistance 2 with someone and I had so much fun! The menus were horrible, there were no checkpoints, it was a bit tricky to go on co-op but the gameplay. It was hard but we had to do it together. He needed me to heal him and I needed him to protect me and deal damage. It made me feel closer to him and it gave me good memories. So a way to make things better is to have the tools to make it good memories.
I’m not sure if anyone knows what I’m talking about but I think it makes sense.
> Bungie didn’t make mistakes at all. That is why Halo: CE and Halo 2 are amazing games, Microsoft was pressuring them and Bungie wanted to do things on there terms.
>
> That’s why I fear for Halo 4. Microsoft better sit back and let 343i do their job with 100% creativity.
Wow a good reception so far.
Ignore the title, i only used it to get the attention. You know how controversy does that sort of thing. Heheh.
I agree with your microsoft assumption though.
> I think I found something. Something important.
> I was playing resistance 2 with someone and I had so much fun! The menus were horrible, there were no checkpoints, it was a bit tricky to go on co-op but the gameplay. It was hard but we had to do it together. He needed me to heal him and I needed him to protect me and deal damage. It made me feel closer to him and it gave me good memories. So a way to make things better is to have the tools to make it good memories.
> I’m not sure if anyone knows what I’m talking about but I think it makes sense.
(sorry to double post)
But i know what you’re talking. I play Brink (with no menus) and get the same feeling.
So im guessing you might be asking for better cooperative play? or just hinting it might be a nice idea.
> > I think I found something. Something important.
> > I was playing resistance 2 with someone and I had so much fun! The menus were horrible, there were no checkpoints, it was a bit tricky to go on co-op but the gameplay. It was hard but we had to do it together. He needed me to heal him and I needed him to protect me and deal damage. It made me feel closer to him and it gave me good memories. So a way to make things better is to have the tools to make it good memories.
> > I’m not sure if anyone knows what I’m talking about but I think it makes sense.
>
> (sorry to double post)
> But i know what you’re talking. I play Brink (with no menus) and get the same feeling.
> So im guessing you might be asking for better cooperative play? or just hinting it might be a nice idea.
Having the game make you smile for solo, having the game bring you closer for multi/co-op.
I did like it before when in the previous campaigns you would always seem to find something new. But I think that multiplayer is also important. I don’t really see why they can’t split it up so that both campaign and multiplayer are equally amazing, just in different ways.
It is true, bungie had a hard time finishing halo 2 and was behind through out its development, it was their first xbox live game and it still had a lot of missions (15). Halo 3 and future games didnt have a lot of missions but was finished in good time. So basically they killed the campaign in certain ways. Halo wars actually did have a lot of missions but that was cause it was delayed and had more time to be made than other halo games.
> In all honesty, it’s not just halo but the ENITRE industry of FPS’s are getting focused on MP. as for halo thats not the case with canon getting broken, thats just bungie being lazy and trying to create a story as easy as possible with no regard to the books, which seems even more lazy when you consider ensamble payed attention to the books when they did halo wars.
>
> all I can say is that they need to start focusing more on a campaign that will really wow people in halo 4, I mean thats what made halo succesfull is the campaign and universe, but with reach we saw that idea go down the toilet with a horrible story and characters you dont even like, I much prefered the ones in halo wars and ODST to the ones in REACH. so if they make an amazeing campaign halo will be restored to it’s former glory
Dude, let me tell you this one thing before you go all crazy about the books. Games > Books and in terms of canon: Games > Books. You should be happy that 343i is deciding to put the books and games together.
> It is true, bungie had a hard time finishing halo 2 and was behind through out its development, it was their first xbox live game and it still had a lot of missions (15). Halo 3 and future games didnt have a lot of missions but was finished in good time. So basically they killed the campaign in certain ways. Halo wars actually did have a lot of missions but that was cause it was delayed and had more time to be made than other halo games.
Well, 343 had 3 years to tweak and perfect Halo 4 and I have very high hopes for it. I think that the problem for campaign was is that we haven’t gotten to explore new places for a while. The design for Halo in CE was brilliant, it was something that no one had really expected, especially in an FPS. In Halo 2 we got to mix and match a bit on Earth, space, and Delta Halo which was awesome. On Halo 3 with the Ark it was like, yeah it’s kind of new but also really similar to the Halo rings. With ODST it kind of strayed from original gameplay because it seemed a lot darker and stealthier than the other Halos. And Reach looks almost like a copy of Earth which we’ve seen in Halo 2, Halo 3, and ODST. We need new environments to scout in, preferably in space.
> > It is true, bungie had a hard time finishing halo 2 and was behind through out its development, it was their first xbox live game and it still had a lot of missions (15). Halo 3 and future games didnt have a lot of missions but was finished in good time. So basically they killed the campaign in certain ways. Halo wars actually did have a lot of missions but that was cause it was delayed and had more time to be made than other halo games.
>
> Well, 343 had 3 years to tweak and perfect Halo 4 and I have very high hopes for it. I think that the problem for campaign was is that we haven’t gotten to explore new places for a while. The design for Halo in CE was brilliant, it was something that no one had really expected, especially in an FPS. In Halo 2 we got to mix and match a bit on Earth, space, and Delta Halo which was awesome. On Halo 3 with the Ark it was like, yeah it’s kind of new but also really similar to the Halo rings. With ODST it kind of strayed from original gameplay because it seemed a lot darker and stealthier than the other Halos. And Reach looks almost like a copy of Earth which we’ve seen in Halo 2, Halo 3, and ODST. We need new environments to scout in, preferably in spaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaace.
> Ive spent a lot of time reading through the fiction portion of the forums and accumulating the idea that many people believe that the Halo series declined from CE.
>
> The difference between CE and the other Halo’s is that it wasnt ‘focused’ on multiplayer.
> I am aware that the PC version had MP. I played it many a time and found it to be a brilliant experience.
>
> So my question to the general public is;
> -Did multiplayer take too much away from the general cannon and glory of the Halo series?
>
> My thoughts: of course not. It was the communities fault for becoming so competitive and wanting the developers to focus on the features of multiplayer instead of the overall game.
>
> What are your thoughts?
On my…someone like minded!
While I, unfortunately, never played the first two Halo games on my own (only played co-op wth my brother and wasn’t really into the series then) I have noticed a lot of developers focusing on the PvP MP side of a game at the expense of the campaign. To me, the best games are the ones that have little to no PvP MP in it at all. Then again, I am really biased against PvP in general, as I found it brings out the worse in people in my experience: at least with this generation (only time I really had fun in a PvP focused game was Planetside).
If Halo 4 must have PvP MP, they should focus on that after the campaign storyline is finalized and polished.
If all the focus is on the PvP MP, I won’t buy the game. The campaign is what will get me to buy the game: if it is rushed/no good, I will not stick around for any of the extra stuff. That’s all that PvP MP (and Firefight, though I have no quams with that loves Firefight) is: extra stuff.
Yes, MP in CE was great, because they built the story first then added MP, both parts came out best there. The rest of the games have had crap/mediocre campaigns and all the focus on MP.
> > In all honesty, it’s not just halo but the ENITRE industry of FPS’s are getting focused on MP. as for halo thats not the case with canon getting broken, thats just bungie being lazy and trying to create a story as easy as possible with no regard to the books, which seems even more lazy when you consider ensamble payed attention to the books when they did halo wars.
> >
> > all I can say is that they need to start focusing more on a campaign that will really wow people in halo 4, I mean thats what made halo succesfull is the campaign and universe, but with reach we saw that idea go down the toilet with a horrible story and characters you dont even like, I much prefered the ones in halo wars and ODST to the ones in REACH. so if they make an amazeing campaign halo will be restored to it’s former glory
>
> Dude, let me tell you this one thing before you go all crazy about the books. Games > Books and in terms of canon: Games > Books. You should be happy that 343i is deciding to put the books and games together.
> Funny enough, the multiplayer was also better the less time they spent on it as they didnt overthink it, they kept it simple. And yes, the campaign has digressed in recent years , but I think that has to due with them spending too much time on features and trying to keep with the times. The campaign definitely needs the most time spent on it so the story and Canon are properly followed and are enticing. Theres more opportunity to add depth in campaign then multiplayer so they should spend more time there.
I completely agree, H2 and CE were by far my favorite MP games because they were so simple and had a good story, now I know people hate on H2’s campaign, but the simple multiplayer was just spectacular, especially for the first Xbox Live game… I think I played somewhere around 8500 games of H2 before they cut the cord, pretty insane.
But yeah, i honestly think they should just spend a whole bunch of time on campaign and keep the MP simple, or just give a lot of options so they players have the choice of how they want to play. I would love to see a return to the Halo 2 feel, as I felt that it was just phenomenal.
> > Ive spent a lot of time reading through the fiction portion of the forums and accumulating the idea that many people believe that the Halo series declined from CE.
> >
> > The difference between CE and the other Halo’s is that it wasnt ‘focused’ on multiplayer.
> > I am aware that the PC version had MP. I played it many a time and found it to be a brilliant experience.
> >
> > So my question to the general public is;
> > -Did multiplayer take too much away from the general cannon and glory of the Halo series?
> >
> > My thoughts: of course not. It was the communities fault for becoming so competitive and wanting the developers to focus on the features of multiplayer instead of the overall game.
> >
> > What are your thoughts?
>
> On my…someone like minded!
>
> While I, unfortunately, never played the first two Halo games on my own (only played co-op wth my brother and wasn’t really into the series then) I have noticed a lot of developers focusing on the PvP MP side of a game at the expense of the campaign. To me, the best games are the ones that have little to no PvP MP in it at all. Then again, I am really biased against PvP in general, as I found it brings out the worse in people in my experience: at least with this generation (only time I really had fun in a PvP focused game was Planetside).
>
> If Halo 4 must have PvP MP, they should focus on that after the campaign storyline is finalized and polished.
>
>
> If all the focus is on the PvP MP, I won’t buy the game. The campaign is what will get me to buy the game: if it is rushed/no good, I will not stick around for any of the extra stuff. That’s all that PvP MP (and Firefight, though I have no quams with that loves Firefight) is: extra stuff.
Cheers =D
I dont completely agree with multiplayer being the worse thing to Halo… But in my opinion, if a developer focuses on MP more than the campaign, it will degrade the soul of its production.
I believe that Bungie set out to depict a a universe that is colourful and deep which is shared through the medium of FPS.
One good point Killrraider13 bought up is the fact that we are getting used to the surroundings of the Halo Universe.
The rings themselves, Earth or other human based planets are areas in these games we are rather use to.
The asset of a new backdrop will do wonders to the development of the games.
I believe, and from what ive seen of H4 we will be given some new worlds to visit. Maybe similar to Halo Wars though. But we’ll see.