I am just curious to know how the “community” feels about Halo these days. I know this doesn’t represent the majority of people, but most of my friends (regardless on how much they like or dislike Halo) have agreed it is too Call of Duty-ish.
How do you feel?
I will still love Halo no matter what, but yes I see CoD in it. Doesn’t really bother me. 
I actually liked Halo’s slow paced gameplay, it saddens me a little that it has evolved into a faster COD-ish style gameplay. But overall I still prefer Halo, and will probably always. My hardcore Halo friends have even expressed disappointment in Halo 4.
I played CoD for the freedom of custom classes.
With this freedom in Halo I have no reason (Other than Zombies) to return to any CoD
Can see a few elements from CoD but nothing that dramatically changes the game play, why this is such a debated topic is beyond me, both games play completely differently to one another.
However, saying that H4 does still need some tweaks just so it doesn’t fall into downward spiral of loosing any form of skill to make it feel closer to CoD than a Halo game, hopefully 343i are reading over forum posts and taking notes from their community to improve it and make it a true Halo game.
Also, I’m enjoying the game so far, hopefully over the coming weeks we start to see updates for what the community wants
The games aren’t even close to even being comparable. Let’s not forget here that it was the original Halo CE that made FPS popular on console in the first place. If anyone owes its popular origins to anything, it’s COD to Halo.
I really enjoyed the campaign and I think what they are doing with Spartan Ops is really cool, but the Multiplayer feels a bit lackluster to me. Halo and Call of Duty are separate games and while I think it’s good to borrow ideas from other games I would like to see them remain separate. Halo seems to borrow more and more from Call of Duty with each title. Hell, the AA, TP, and SU are basically Perks and with the instant respawns, playlist, and rank system it feels like I am a miniscule health system away from playing Call of Duty: Halo.
With the changes to Halo with Halo 4, I guess I’m out of options for future any games in the FPS genre. I liked how new players & veterans alike, were on even footing, personal skill & practice were the deciding factors, not who has the best, most awesome perks & better upgraded loadouts.
I miss the Halo of yore. In fact, I miss the multiplayer games of yore in general. Today’s multiplayer games focus too much on the experience each player is having. There’s too much “rule bending” so that everyone may have a ‘good experience’ through the use of perks, loadouts, etc. so that each player is able to play using a rule-set they feel benefits them instead of every player playing by the one rule-set. A one rule-set game is something like Halo: CE - you don’t get to choose what you spawn with or what your attributes are, everyone’s the same. Whilst rule tailoring is found in games like CoD, BF and now Halo 4. You used to play within the game’s bounds, but now you play within your bounds. It’s not an environment that encourages growth, and consequently such games require little thinking or strategical planning.
Unlockables, excess rewards, and the hand holding common to most new FPSs is annoying too :<
YES they are. They both have people. Guns, grenades, kills and ammo! They are both first perspective and the both have maps. I would even go so far as to compare the similarities between weapons. Some are full auto and some burst fire. Disgusting.
Ban them both I say. They are corrupting young minds…
I think they both are too similiar to Wolfenstein 3D.
While I can see the similarities, they still stand so completely different apart. Halo has always been about Symmetrical maps of RvB duking it out. People are complaining about the loadouts but the truth is that they aren’t horribly broken where as in CoD everyone pretty much used a set perk system very similar to one another. Also, everyone does start off on a even playing field. Maybe we don’t all spawn with the same weapons (except for Slayer Pro.) but they are all independent of each other. There is no ‘God’ weapon like there has always been in CoD. (M16, Famas. MP7, Ect.) While some may argue that the DMR is the best, I’ll agree it may need a little nerf, but I’ve been able to do the same job with the BR and even the underrated LightRifle. Also, Halo multiplayer is extremely more personal in the sense that gun fights can get intense in certain situations and nothing is better than knowing you just outshot your opponent where as in CoD it’s all the same ADS hold trigger concept.
These games really shouldn’t be compared, only thing you could compare them to is quality and whether or not which is more entertaining. Where as in my opinion, Halo will always be.
I don’t know. At first I was enjoying it, but now it is really starting to irritate me like Reach did. I think the game will die down after the novelty wears off. Honestly, the core aspect of Halo is dead (at least to me). I don’t care much for the maps, either. I probably wont be playing much Halo now that I’ve beat the campaign and I probably wont buy Halo 5 unless they change this Call of Duty style gameplay.
Sorry for the double post, but I would like to keep this topic alive for just a little longer and elaborate a bit on what I meant by the “core aspect” of Halo.
Pre-Reach:
Weapon spawns
Power-ups
Death timers
Map control
Post-Reach:
Loadouts
Press X to respawn
Run-and-gun
Can you really name that many differences between them now? They both have Loadouts, Perks, a run-and-gun style of play, K/D rank system (XP-based), level (rank)-based rewards, and Challenges. I’m sure there’s more I’ve missed, but this is just a few off the top of my head. They are essentially the same game with different graphics. Why remove weapon pickups? Why remove power-ups and add Armor Abilities? Why take away map control? Why take away the even playing field? These things are what made Halo and now it feels like I’m playing just another FPS. You should never take away from a game. This, of course, is just my opinion.
Both?
The only unlockable’s I want in a Halo game is the armor. I think Reach did a good job with having to buy it, saving up to get that bad -Yoink- helmet was well worth it. Not to mention the armor was beautiful in Reach. Exception could be the weapon skins Another thing that bothers me is why they didn’t bring back Military Ranks or something similar. SR 1- whatever seems rather dull. Overall not too happy with Multiplayer at the moment.
CoD became big because of halo, so when the former gets more popular the creator needs to adapt. I find this halo to be more like star wars than anything, SPOILER FOLLOWS!!!
doing a death star trench run? come on, not to mention the mediclorian count in the didect to Br super high
> Can you really name that many differences between them now? They both have Loadouts, Perks, a run-and-gun style of play, K/D rank system (XP-based), level (rank)-based rewards, and Challenges. I’m sure there’s more I’ve missed, but this is just a few off the top of my head. They are essentially the same game with different graphics. Why remove weapon pickups? Why remove power-ups and add Armor Abilities? Why take away map control? Why take away the even playing field? These things are what made Halo and now it feels like I’m playing just another FPS. You should never take away from a game. This, of course, is just my opinion.
That is not opinion, that is fact.
The game needed to evolve cause the genre evolved, most fps games have custom every thing and sprinting so its only expected. For those of you who are getting butthurt about it and saying it’s to “COD-ish” think about this, games have been taking the best ideas from other games for a long time now. How many times have you played a platformer and went WTF! YOU COLLECT TOKENS AND JUMP ON THERE HEADS!? ITS TO MARIO-ISH! Heres the real question do you enjoy the game and have fun with it? If so just play and enjoy who cares about the concept.