Change for change's sake: The ugly truth

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

Most gameplay discussions boil down to the following question:
Is change really necessary or is it just change for the change’s sake?

Most critics argue that H5’s gameplay additions (Sprint, Smart Scope,…) just aren’t worthy gameplay additions to Halo’s core formula, even worse they are damaging other aspects of the game (shooting mechanics, map design).

While some points of criticism are probably exaggerated the more I think about it the more I realize that these people are actually right.
If you set out from a certain point – and that point being Halo’s core formula – some of the additions actually really hurt those mechanics.

The underlying ‘dilemma’ is that Halo’s gameplay has already been perfected over the course of H1/2/3 and over a period of about 10 years. You can accuse Bungie of many things but they knew and still know how to create core gameplay mechanics that just work.

It’s like building a perfectly working machine and then adding things just because you have to. From a pure logical standpoint it’s obvious: Don’t add things that you don’t need (from a strictly gameplay point of view).

But here comes the twist: If we think that through to the end there’s only one possible conclusion – that we don’t need another full-scale full-price Halo game.
But that’s exactly what happened with Halo Reach. Even Bungie didn’t know how to evolve it’s own formula, because this formula didn’t need refinement to begin with. There are only so many sequels you can make until every further addition becomes absolutely unnecessary in complementing the core formula.

That’s exactly where we are right now.

The underlying problem is that sequels dictate change whether it’s for the [core formula’s] better or not. The market demands a fresh experience, especially if it’s your ambition (with a AAA, high budget, system seller game) to reach a 9+ million customer base and not only a vocal, dedicated but relatively small subgroup. I don’t even start to talk about critics’ reactions either.
After 14 years on the market (which is quite a long time for a videogame) Halo is a mature franchise with all of the typical problems now.

What I think some people have to realize is that they already played the perfect Halo experience – some minor things aside it doesn’t get better than this gameplay wise. Or in other words: It’s a mission impossible to preserve the old formula AND offer something fresh at the same time without automatically messing with that formula.

So you either long for that pure classic experience (which is basically the MCC) or you’re setting yourself up for another inevitable disappointment.

Bungie had about 10 years of constantly refining and fine-tuning their own creation until they ran out of real innovations. They released Halo Reach and basically made the right choice: To leave the Halo franchise behind.

So my question is: What do you expect 343i to do?

I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.

Critics reject talking about perception, about immersion but that’s exactly what Halo is about now. It’s about a fresh experience after 14 years of Halo (10 years being ‘classic Halo’), even if that means 343i has to mess with the core formula. They’re trying their best to find a balance that works at least for most people.

2

I’d say this change is long overdue, this is the leap i expected with Halo 3, or at the very least Halo Reach. I love Halo, i love its universe, characters, lore, weapons… and i would love to see all that richness applied to a properly advanced multiplayer experience. I can still enjoy and have fun with classic Halos, but i wouldn’t want a new main entry to play like them. I want new games to offer new things. Thankfully 343 agrees with that vision and they seem to be delivering. It would be easy for them to forever rest on the shoulders of the old trilogy, it would be safer and older fans would be happy with them… but the fact they are willing to take these risks is why i respect them so much.

3

This isn’t risk. Risk is doing something different from everyone else. 343i are adding the same features everyone else is adding.

4

> 2547348539238747;3:
> This isn’t risk. Risk is doing something different from everyone else. 343i are adding the same features everyone else is adding.

Risk is still trying to make a lot of these features work in Halo. Really I’m more concerned about the foundation of the game, as it stands as a part arena shooter. And things like spectator mode, a Star Craft II esque ranking, et cetera don’t bother me, they make a me very excited, but the inclusion of the sprint-even if nerfed- with other things add problems. Mostly sprint though.

5

I think one could already fairly argue that Bungie nailed something in regards to gameplay with CE or rather they were really onto something with that game but already with H2 they “deformed” that special something they developed by playing more with things around than optimizing/improving (as far as it would be possible at that time) the gameplay of CE.

However, you sometimes see people arguing that just releasing basically the same Halo but with new maps and game types is no change/improvement of the former title’s gameplay. Yet I would actually disagree, for the most part.
A „simple“ map can change a game’s gameplay and the way how you perceive and play said game drastically.
I mean CE on prisoner plays completely different than on Chillout. H2 plays completely different on Lockout than on Midship. H3 plays completely different on Guardian than on the Pit. One enjoys playing Halo on the one map while at the same time dislikes playing it on the other even though it is still the same game with the exact same settings.

Map design is likely the most deepest aspect in the multiplayer design, yet it gets for the most part completely neglected, heck, or even made unnecessarily complicated by the developers and instead they focus on „mixing things up a little“ and keeping things fresh with and by adding more shallow gimmicks.
They don’t improve anything at a fundamental basis with said gimmicks. All they do is actually creating fancy impressive pictures which are fun to look at and entertaining for the moment but nothing more than that.

When thinking about it, the demand for constant, hell, often 180° changes for a game is actually quite weird and eventually cannot lead to any good result in the long run because you are doing nothing else but constantly changing a games character, that what defines it, that what people have liked about it, got accustomed to, want more of.
I mean where would for example football/soccer now be if the rules were constantly changing with the years like: i.e. instead of using the classic football using a basketball or you turn it from foot play to hand play, etc? No one expects/demands that here so why is suddenly a video game’s gameplay that managed to approve itself expected to actually deliver an entirely different game but under the same name?
I think a game like Counterstrike understood how to stay relevant and popular. Call of Duty’s Modern Warfare series basically understood as well in my opinion.

However, I will also say that with H4 (and I think also with H5), a new studio, a new saga, nothing would have spoken against a clear cut, against a complete redesign of Halo, against truly designing a different game but still with Halo as the title.
But neither H4 nor H5 are that.
H4 was basically a „tweaked“ Reach with modern AAA FPS elements thrown into it and H5 looks like moving a bit towards classic Halo gameplay while also moving a bit towards modern FPS gameplay all strapped together with all kinds of compromises.
Was H4’s and will H5’s multiplayer be fun? I say yes. Had H4’s and will H5’s multiplayer have any memorable character? I say no and that is sad and won’t spawn anything good in my opinion.

As a closure, now after H5’s changes what will be the next things that have to change with H6?
Will we see how games will scrap all the clutter they collected over the years with their „innovations“ and revert back to their pure forms because that will then be the modern trend, going all vintage? Will we see how more stuff gets forced into it because of the constant superficial demand for new stuff?
Whatever it is, I think this constant character change or rather that loss of a clear and consistent identity cannot end well for a game/brand.

6

> 2533274793332039;1:
> Most gameplay discussions boil down to the following question:
> Is change really necessary or is it just change for the change’s sake?
>
> Most critics argue that H5’s gameplay additions (Sprint, Smart Scope,…) just aren’t worthy gameplay additions to Halo’s core formula, even worse they are damaging other aspects of the game (shooting mechanics, map design).
>
> While some points of criticism are probably exaggerated the more I think about it the more I realize that these people are actually right.
> If you set out from a certain point – and that point being Halo’s core formula – some of the additions actually really hurt those mechanics.
>
> The underlying ‘dilemma’ is that Halo’s gameplay has already been perfected over the course of H1/2/3 and over a period of about 10 years. You can accuse Bungie of many things but they knew and still know how to create core gameplay mechanics that just work.
>
> It’s like building a perfectly working machine and then adding things just because you have to. From a pure logical standpoint it’s obvious: Don’t add things that you don’t need (from a strictly gameplay point of view).
>
> But here comes the twist: If we think that through to the end there’s only one possible conclusion – that we don’t need another full-scale full-price Halo game.
> But that’s exactly what happened with Halo Reach. Even Bungie didn’t know how to evolve it’s own formula, because this formula didn’t need refinement to begin with. There are only so many sequels you can make until every further addition becomes absolutely unnecessary in complementing the core formula.
>
>
>
> That’s exactly where we are right now.
>
>
>
> The underlying problem is that sequels dictate change whether it’s for the [core formula’s] better or not. The market demands a fresh experience, especially if it’s your ambition (with a AAA, high budget, system seller game) to reach a 9+ million customer base and not only a vocal, dedicated but relatively small subgroup. I don’t even start to talk about critics’ reactions either.
> After 14 years on the market (which is quite a long time for a videogame) Halo is a mature franchise with all of the typical problems now.
>
> What I think some people have to realize is that they already played the perfect Halo experience – some minor things aside it doesn’t get better than this gameplay wise. Or in other words: It’s a mission impossible to preserve the old formula AND offer something fresh at the same time without automatically messing with that formula.
>
> So you either long for that pure classic experience (which is basically the MCC) or you’re setting yourself up for another inevitable disappointment.
>
> Bungie had about 10 years of constantly refining and fine-tuning their own creation until they ran out of real innovations. They released Halo Reach and basically made the right choice: To leave the Halo franchise behind.
>
> So my question is: What do you expect 343i to do?
>
> I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.
>
> Critics reject talking about perception, about immersion but that’s exactly what Halo is about now. It’s about a fresh experience after 14 years of Halo (10 years being ‘classic Halo’), even if that means 343i has to mess with the core formula. They’re trying their best to find a balance that works at least for most people.

i agree with pretty much everything u said. and i would rather let halo die slowly then see it keep changing into a game that no loner feels like halo . imo i wish halo would have stopped when reach came out cause its only gotten worse after halo 3.

7

> 2547348539238747;3:
> This isn’t risk. Risk is doing something different from everyone else. 343i are adding the same features everyone else is adding.

First of all let me just say that I’m 100% happy with literally everything in Guardians so far.

Anyway, it doesn’t really matter if all the changes that 343 are making are changes/features that are already in other games. Those changes might fit those specific games very well, this doesn’t mean that they’re going to fit Halo automatically. Especially because Halo plays a whole lot different than most modern day shooters.

8

> 2533274816380673;4:
> > 2547348539238747;3:
> > This isn’t risk. Risk is doing something different from everyone else. 343i are adding the same features everyone else is adding.
>
>
> Risk is still trying to make a lot of these features work in Halo. Really I’m more concerned about the foundation of the game, as it stands as a part arena shooter. And things like spectator mode, a Star Craft II esque ranking, et cetera don’t bother me, they make a me very excited, but the inclusion of the sprint-even if nerfed- with other things add problems. Mostly sprint though.

I like the idea of spectator mode, I’ve been waiting for it to be included in Halo since before twitch was a thing. There are many things we can adapt, like dual wielding but lets put out spin on it. The sad truth is features we are borrowing need to be nerfed because they are messing with gameplay.

and with that, remember what happened to dual wielding.

9

several things

1- 343 is after a buck. offering a similar experience to other FPS is the first step in winning those dollars. is this the best approach? with the right safeties in place it can be.
firstly, they can always offer a “classic MM”. Make changes to the gameplay just enough to where it isn’t like you’re playing

2-Bungie hasn’t had a good/original idea since H3. Destiny feels so much like halo reach its maddening. I liked the storyline and enjoyed it, but it ALWAYS had that feel like it was Halo Re-skinned. Bungie is also chasing that buck, and wanted to reach a broader audience. something they couldn’t do releasing MS exclusives.

3-Very rarely does a game do to gaming what Halo did. 14 years ago I became addicted to Halo. I played some friends at their house and got owned, but it was a blast. I left and went straight out and got one. MAN!! was I surprised at the weight of the Xbox original. it really felt like a sturdy system. anyway, before I take this trip down memory road, im going to stop.

we keep measuring the next Halo by our memories of older titles. I compared Halo to Goldeneye and knew it was the next step in FPS. having many of the Halo titles on one disk has shown me the room I had for complaints from one title to the next. I never complained(too much), because it was just part of the progression. The n00b combo is one that comes to mind, but you adapt or quit playing. H3 eventually fell to the wrath of modding and “the hunt for a legit 50”. TMCC issues aside, part of the outcry is the increasing popularity in forums like this and the internet in general. way too often does someone speculate what a specific feature will add or take away from a game and before you get your hands on it, people are walking away(or threatening) because of it. give it a chance, with so many versions of Halo as a starting point for fans, we are all making compromises to have fun playing in a world we have grown to love.

lets see what this game really feels like, and how much the “maps shrink” from the NEW sprint. im willing to bet, like many developers today, that once the game is out and they have a large sample of what people want, if classic is really high in demand, it will become a playlist.

10

> 2533274868265432;9:
> several things
>
> 1- 343 is after a buck. offering a similar experience to other FPS is the first step in winning those dollars. is this the best approach? with the right safeties in place it can be.
> firstly, they can always offer a “classic MM”. Make changes to the gameplay just enough to where it isn’t like you’re playing

I just can’t buy the argument that Halo needs to adopt things that are in every other FPS just to make money. Halo will sell on the Halo name no matter what, and I’d bet that the vast majority of people with XB1s are going to buy Halo 5 just because it’s an exclusive. They could literally repackage Reach, stuff it with extra Reachy-ness (extra bloom lawl), and just put the word “Halo 5” on the box and it would sell first day (and sadly enough, probably for weeks to come).

Ok, an exaggeration, but you see what I mean. Profit will be made no matter what.

11

> 2533274913448583;10:
> > 2533274868265432;9:
> > several things
> >
> > 1- 343 is after a buck. offering a similar experience to other FPS is the first step in winning those dollars. is this the best approach? with the right safeties in place it can be.
> > firstly, they can always offer a “classic MM”. Make changes to the gameplay just enough to where it isn’t like you’re playing
>
>
> I just can’t buy the argument that Halo needs to adopt things that are in every other FPS just to make money. Halo will sell on the Halo name no matter what, and I’d bet that the vast majority of people with XB1s are going to buy Halo 5 just because it’s an exclusive. They could literally repackage Reach, stuff it with extra Reachy-ness (extra bloom lawl), and just put the word “Halo 5” on the box and it would sell first day (and sadly enough, probably for weeks to come).
>
> Ok, an exaggeration, but you see what I mean. Profit will be made no matter what.

I agree,but they know they could likely do what you describe… Hell, EA does it for every sports game they make and people swear by them(I quit supporting EA due to this)

but those NEW dollars are the motivator.
I could see your point too. I KNOW I would support HCE v7 with new skins and some dlc. by now it would be consisting of several dozen maps, gametypes and playable characters.

12

> I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.

So why did Halo 4 fail to appeal to anyone?
Did it deviate too little from the formula?
It had sprint and jetpacks and perks and practically every awesum addition a casual could ask for.

Considering everyone is an apparent expert on what the market wants, I would love to hear the analysis here.

> but the fact they are willing to take these risks

What risks? Doing what everyone else is doing is a risk?

Assassins Creed was a risk. A game playing follow the leader to other games in the same genre is not taking risks.

13

> 2533274819302824;12:
> > I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.
>
>
> So why did Halo 4 fail to appeal to anyone?
> Did it deviate too little from the formula?
> It had sprint and jetpacks and perks and practically every awesum addition a casual could ask for.
>
> Considering everyone is an apparent expert on what the market wants, I would love to hear the analysis here.

It shouldn’t take any of those things for a “casual” to enjoy a game. halo succeeded because of the competitive atmosphere. Tournaments, etc…H4 didn’t appeal to anyone because of many competitive game breaking features

14

Thumbs up.

Really it’s true wether you like it or not.Well if you don’t, stick with Halo mcc, others will move onto Halo 5,I loved Halo 3, i played the -Yoink- out of it for 3 years till morning times,but its just…old.
I want new stuff,many people want new stuff,i loved Halo Reach and Halo 4 too. They are awesome games,just different to the “simple” halo gameplay, because it needs to change.
I can’t wait to play Halo 5,it looks so perfect to me, its like taking the “classic” halos and the most modern ones and making a baby off of them while also making it fresh.

15

> 2535421185086165;13:
> > 2533274819302824;12:
> > > I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.
> >
> >
> >
> > So why did Halo 4 fail to appeal to anyone?
> > Did it deviate too little from the formula?
> > It had sprint and jetpacks and perks and practically every awesum addition a casual could ask for.
> >
> > Considering everyone is an apparent expert on what the market wants, I would love to hear the analysis here.
>
>
> It shouldn’t take any of those things for a “casual” to enjoy a game. halo succeeded because of the competitive atmosphere. Tournaments, etc…H4 didn’t appeal to anyone because of many competitive game breaking features

No. Halo succeeded because no other shooters compared to it’s level of quality at the time (2001-2007). Now the market is saturated with shooters, most with the same level of quality in its production. You could see the signs of halo declining after COD4s release.

16

> 2533274819617328;15:
> > 2535421185086165;13:
> > > 2533274819302824;12:
> > > > I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > So why did Halo 4 fail to appeal to anyone?
> > > Did it deviate too little from the formula?
> > > It had sprint and jetpacks and perks and practically every awesum addition a casual could ask for.
> > >
> > > Considering everyone is an apparent expert on what the market wants, I would love to hear the analysis here.
> >
> >
> >
> > It shouldn’t take any of those things for a “casual” to enjoy a game. halo succeeded because of the competitive atmosphere. Tournaments, etc…H4 didn’t appeal to anyone because of many competitive game breaking features
>
>
> No. Halo succeeded because no other shooters compared to it’s level of quality at the time (2001-2007). Now the market is saturated with shooters, most with the same level of quality in its production. You could see the signs of halo declining after COD4s release.

Lol.lol.lol. Quality can be crap. As long as the competitiveness in the game is there people will play and love it. no other game compares to Halo that’s why people want it to be good, be good in a competitive way. why do you think people hated H4? Bottom line is it leaned torward newer players, it was easy. Other games only succeed now b/c Halo has lost the competitive depth it once had. If H2 came out today with those same crappy graphics yet it was the most competitive game people would play it instead of newer reskinned cod. anyday.

17

> 2535421185086165;16:
> > 2533274819617328;15:
> > > 2535421185086165;13:
> > > > 2533274819302824;12:
> > > > > I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > So why did Halo 4 fail to appeal to anyone?
> > > > Did it deviate too little from the formula?
> > > > It had sprint and jetpacks and perks and practically every awesum addition a casual could ask for.
> > > >
> > > > Considering everyone is an apparent expert on what the market wants, I would love to hear the analysis here.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It shouldn’t take any of those things for a “casual” to enjoy a game. halo succeeded because of the competitive atmosphere. Tournaments, etc…H4 didn’t appeal to anyone because of many competitive game breaking features
> >
> >
> >
> > No. Halo succeeded because no other shooters compared to it’s level of quality at the time (2001-2007). Now the market is saturated with shooters, most with the same level of quality in its production. You could see the signs of halo declining after COD4s release.
>
>
> Lol.lol.lol. Quality can be crap. As long as the competitiveness in the game is there people will play and love it. no other game compares to Halo that’s why people want it to be good, be good in a competitive way. why do you think people hated H4? Bottom line is it leaned torward newer players, it was easy. Other games only succeed now b/c Halo has lost the competitive depth it once had. If H2 came out today with those same crappy graphics yet it was the most competitive game people would play it instead of newer reskinned cod. anyday.

BUT THAT’S THE POINT! They wouldn’t, there are games like LOL and Counter Strike go that make halos competitive players look like pipsqueaks, and what do they have in common? THEY’RE ON PC! Meanwhile new kids just flock to Cod for it’s lazyness flooding the console market. So if halo2 did release on xbox tommorow the kids would still play COD and the competitive guys would still be playing LOL or something.

18

I really hope they don’t keep the voice that calls out your killing sprees and double kills and all of that. The announcer just sounds wrong It sounds soooo corny and weird I dunno why they changed the voice at all! I mean I know it had to be different but I really hope they can re record or change a few of them some don’t sound bad but others just sound ridiculous!

19

> 2533274819617328;15:
> > 2535421185086165;13:
> > > 2533274819302824;12:
> > > > I tell you this: We either accept that Halo is slowly transforming into something that isn’t ‘classic Halo’ or we kill the whole franchise with our constant negativity.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > So why did Halo 4 fail to appeal to anyone?
> > > Did it deviate too little from the formula?
> > > It had sprint and jetpacks and perks and practically every awesum addition a casual could ask for.
> > >
> > > Considering everyone is an apparent expert on what the market wants, I would love to hear the analysis here.
> >
> >
> >
> > It shouldn’t take any of those things for a “casual” to enjoy a game. halo succeeded because of the competitive atmosphere. Tournaments, etc…H4 didn’t appeal to anyone because of many competitive game breaking features
>
>
> No. Halo succeeded because no other shooters compared to it’s level of quality at the time (2001-2007). Now the market is saturated with shooters, most with the same level of quality in its production. You could see the signs of halo declining after COD4s release.

I’m sorry, but that’s just incorrect. In Halo 3’s lifespan alone, MW1, Battlefield Bad Company 2, CoD: WaW, and MW2 (which came out several years later), all of which could considered the best of their respective franchise, directly competed with Halo 3. It remained on the top of the charts, however, with the exception of MW2 occasionally passing it briefly in population. As far as its popularity decreasing after MW1, Halo 3 retained aa higher population than that game. In fact, there were still more people playing it than MW1 before the MCC (haven’t played it on 360 since release to check haha). To say that quality shooters didn’t exist is just plain incorrect.

20

> whitewatr
> i agree with pretty much everything u said. and i would rather let halo die slowly then see it keep changing into a game that no loner feels like halo . imo i wish halo would have stopped when reach came out cause its only gotten worse after halo 3.

You agree with what I said yet I don’t agree with your conclusion.
I still love all things Halo, I’ve just accepted that things will be different. I won’t forget the glorious days of HCE, H2 and H3 – those will forever have a special place in my heart.
But I, a diehard Halo fan, know that things can’t stay the same, so those experiences won’t come back (I had the most awesome LAN-parties back in the day).

My standpoint is a pragmatic one: Even the worst Halo game is a thousand times more Halo than any other game on the market. Plus people often forget that even if you consider (for example) Halo 4 a bad Halo game it’s still one of the best FPS-experiences on the market.

There are so many aspects I still enjoy: The universe, the characters, the art-style, the gameplay mechanics (shield system, gun-melee-grenade, weapons on map, no-load-outs,…) – that is more than enough ‘Halo’ for me.

I know that some changes might be problematic yet I am also not blind to what 343i tries to achieve.

> Ramir3z77
> So why did Halo 4 fail to appeal to anyone? Did it deviate too little from the formula? It had sprint and jetpacks and perks and practically every awesum addition a casual could ask for. Considering everyone is an apparent expert on what the market wants, I would love to hear the analysis here

That’s not the point at all.
My argument was that from a strictly (gameplay) mechanic point of view we’ve reached a point where every further addition is a threat to the underlying core formula (because this formula didn’t need refinement to begin with).
In other words: It’s impossible to create a fresh experience (and by that I mean mechanical additions) without automatically harming some aspects of the core formula.

Never did I say that Halo 4’s approach was the right one. The right approach is to find a balance of old and new – and that is exactly what 343i is doing with H5 (and why H4 failed).

I find it hilarious that people refer to CoD as some kind of best practice. Many people hate CoD exactly because so little is changing from release to release. Just keep in mind that the CoD boom started with CoD MW in 2007 – at that time the Halo craze had long reached it’s peak.
It’s because of the general pressure that Sledgehammer offered a fresh wind (including new mechanics such as Thruster Pack) in the recent Advanced Warfare. At the moment CoD is still the ‘in-thing’ as was Halo in the years before, but it’s also coming close to that peak.

Counter Strike is another inadequate example. It’s a PC-game with a radically different target audience and a completely different business model. Counter Strike is at it’s core an E-sport game. Halo is a system seller that appeals to many gamers, hardcore and casuals alike.

The notion that 343i implements new mechanics just to please the casuals is some form of ignorance too. Of course it helps to reach out to a new generation of players.
But it’s absolutely untrue that these are the only people who respond well to these additions. Halo fans play other games too. Halo fans get accustomed to other mechanics (such as Sprint) too. Halo fans long for a fresh experiences too.

I’ve organized Halo LAN parties with my friends since the H2 days. While some couldn’t get enough I’ve witnessed some sort of fatigue that started with H3.
And I felt the same way too.

I’m sick and tired that this is constantly being ignored as if I’m some sort of casual player now. Sorry I don’t buy into that ‘real players’ VS ‘casuals’ -Yoink-.
The reality is way more complex than that. And the reality is that 343i is neither exclusively serving the casuals nor ignoring the needs of the most hardcore.