… now I see posts about how people want Bungie back and how Halo 4 wouldn’t have sucked if Bungie did it. We as a community are hard to please. halo 4, along with nearly all games, has flaws. its not an aweful game. Everyone wanted change, we got change, we all couldn’t wait for a new perspective of the universe and we got it, now everyone wants to revert back to Bungie after we claimed Bungie ruined Halo with the release of Reach. man we are finiky! I like Halo 4 and am glad it was changed because if it hadn’t been changed people would say it sucks because its the same halo game. we are never happy.
Who wanted change? If we wanted change, we wanted it in the removal of things that had been previously added (AAs, bloom, etc.) and the return to standards of earlier Halos (jump height, movement speed, etc.). We didn’t want the addition of more crap that breaks the fundamentals of weapon and map control (ordnance, tactical/support upgrades).
Halo 4 is perfect and I was right to pre-order the LE and have faith in 343i.
I’ll say it again, this is like when Obama took over after Bush.
Everything that’s wrong with Halo now is no longer Bungie’s fault starting with Reach.
Halo apparently only got bad when 343 took over.
Yeesh.
That’s because even -Yoinking!- Reach is good compared to 4.And that’s saying a lot.
Bungie wouldn’t have made a halo 4, they didn’t even want to make Reach
Yes OP. just give it a few weeks all will be gravy once everyone gets over whining.
> I’ll say it again, this is like when Obama took over after Bush.
>
> Everything that’s wrong with Halo now is no longer Bungie’s fault starting with Reach.
>
> Halo apparently only got bad when 343 took over.
>
> Yeesh.
No one denies that Reach was a step backwards from H2 and 3. But 343 had a chance to start over with a clean slate, stick to the foundational elements of the Halo franchise, and produce a competitive, balanced game that would return Halo to its former glory, after the momentary hickup of Reach. Instead, they did the complete opposite, introducing more stuff that breaks the fundamentals that made Halo Halo. Bungie was at fault for what they did poorly in Reach. But 343 did even worse with H4 than Bungie did with Reach.
> Who wanted change? If we wanted change, we wanted it in the removal of things that had been previously added (AAs, bloom, etc.) and the return to standards of earlier Halos (jump height, movement speed, etc.). We didn’t want the addition of more crap that breaks the fundamentals of weapon and map control (ordnance, tactical/support upgrades).
Not to mention they also destroyed custom games. No more instakill settings (breaks any fat kid infection gametype), no more classic infection, where starting weapons could be set for zombies, no more race OR vip, which has killed the racetrack genre of custom games. There’s no ranked and social playlists like Halo 3… it goes on and on.
Yeah, some things are cool (new weapons are fun to use, the flood skins are a nice twist), but when an entire team is loaded up on power weapons, while all my ordinance drops are needlers, frags, and speed boost, when I’m fighting binary rifles and incineration cannons…And I can’t remake my favorite custom maps from any halo that had zombies start out with non-default weapons…
They added plasma pistol spawns to BTB, they added bolt shot for one hit kill side arms. I think this says enough about what’s wrong with Halo 4.
> Who wanted change? If we wanted change, we wanted it in the removal of things that had been previously added (AAs, bloom, etc.) and the return to standards of earlier Halos (jump height, movement speed, etc.). We didn’t want the addition of more crap that breaks the fundamentals of weapon and map control (ordnance, tactical/support upgrades).
understood. Don’t you think these additions add a level of depth in order to sustain map control? With halo 3, a team controlled the map, seized areas that could be taken over and extra. you have to ensure you have the proper weapon to sustain control, sniper, rocks, ext. if you didn’t have that you had to combat what was coming your way. I think with perks and PoD it adds depth for those to figure out how to combat it. yes, its random and make it difficult to hold a map with people get drop a railgun or whatever but it has to be counter with a strategy. it make people have to be good with various weapons. people can’t just depend on sniper or rocks in halo 4. So i think it adds depth map control, a bit random but battlefields will always have random variables that have to be reacted to. but i see your point shoopdawoop.
> No one denies that Reach was a step backwards from H2 and 3. But 343 had a chance to start over with a clean slate, stick to the foundational elements of the Halo franchise, and produce a competitive, balanced game that would return Halo to its former glory, after the momentary hickup of Reach. Instead, they did the complete opposite, introducing more stuff that breaks the fundamentals that made Halo Halo. Bungie was at fault for what they did poorly in Reach. But 343 did even worse with H4 than Bungie did with Reach.
Couldn’t have said it better than this…
As in politics, all I ever read on these forums is an individual’s opinion stated as fact.
It doesn’t matter how much you scream - without civility, logic, and an open mind - those that you’re trying to convince, will never listen.
I really enjoyed reach. Especially in the last year and a half before Halo 4 came out. Reach had issues that where eventually fixed, but I’m not sure whether Halo 4 will have it’s issues fixed.
Sure they did. They got bashed after making Halo Reach, ODST, Halo Wars, 3, 2, and CE. There will always be haters.
> > I’ll say it again, this is like when Obama took over after Bush.
> >
> > Everything that’s wrong with Halo now is no longer Bungie’s fault starting with Reach.
> >
> > Halo apparently only got bad when 343 took over.
> >
> > Yeesh.
>
> No one denies that Reach was a step backwards from H2 and 3. But 343 had a chance to start over with a clean slate, stick to the foundational elements of the Halo franchise, and produce a competitive, balanced game that would return Halo to its former glory, after the momentary hickup of Reach. Instead, they did the complete opposite, introducing more stuff that breaks the fundamentals that made Halo Halo. Bungie was at fault for what they did poorly in Reach. But 343 did even worse with H4 than Bungie did with Reach.
don’t you think if 343 made a halo like H3, people would be up in arms saying its the same halo game just with new maps and they just got their $60 ripped off? at some point, change/evolution has to be made, for better or worse, change, in all things, will eventually have to happen. its the people in these times that have to adapt to the change whether good or bad. otherwise we would all still be in candle light saying how electric costs to much and all this wiring ruins the flow of the house and how the light bulbs are too bright and Edison ruined how we read books at night, we wish we had our lanterns and candles back. just saying bruh. I like the change, sorry it doesn’t appeal to everyone. Hopefully Halo 5 will get more people together on one accord.
> don’t you think if 343 made a halo like H3, people would be up in arms saying its the same halo game just with new maps and they just got their $60 ripped off? at some point, change/evolution has to be made, for better or worse, change, in all things, will eventually have to happen. its the people in these times that have to adapt to the change whether good or bad. otherwise we would all still be in candle light saying how electric costs to much and all this wiring ruins the flow of the house and how the light bulbs are too bright and Edison ruined how we read books at night, we wish we had our lanterns and candles back. just saying bruh. I like the change, sorry it doesn’t appeal to everyone. Hopefully Halo 5 will get more people together on one accord.
I doubt Halo 5 will have the same success as Halo 4. A lot of players have had enough after Reach and Halo 4 and will never return.
But, I could be totally wrong…
bungie lost creative interest in halo…not that it means much in terms of gameplay but the lead writer stopped working on halo exclusively after halo 2
> understood. Don’t you think these additions add a level of depth in order to sustain map control? With halo 3, a team controlled the map, seized areas that could be taken over and extra. you have to ensure you have the proper weapon to sustain control, sniper, rocks, ext. if you didn’t have that you had to combat what was coming your way. I think with perks and PoD it adds depth for those to figure out how to combat it. yes, its random and make it difficult to hold a map with people get drop a railgun or whatever but it has to be counter with a strategy. it make people have to be good with various weapons. people can’t just depend on sniper or rocks in halo 4. So i think it adds depth map control, a bit random but battlefields will always have random variables that have to be reacted to. but i see your point shoopdawoop.
I appreciate your civility, and I see your point of view on the matter as well. What you say may be possible, but I think I would be inclined to disagree.
I believe that tactical and support upgrades, along with specializations, break one fundamental element of Halo, namely that you are supposed to start the game on exactly the same playing field as your opponent.
Further, I believe that a lack of standard weapon spawns, along with ordnance drops, break another fundamental element of Halo, namely that you as a player (in FFA modes) or as a member of a team (in TS modes) are supposed to work to control power weapons placed logically on the map in order to control the map and best the other team. Ordnance drops render map spawns nearly useless, and the combination of ordnance drops and Plasma Pistols available in loadouts have rendered vehicles in BTB a joke. A map is supposed to be balanced around one Splaser on the map, if it’s appropriate to the map. When half the opposing team is running around with one, something is wrong.
> … now I see posts about how people want Bungie back and how Halo 4 wouldn’t have sucked if Bungie did it. We as a community are hard to please. halo 4, along with nearly all games, has flaws. its not an aweful game. Everyone wanted change, we got change, we all couldn’t wait for a new perspective of the universe and we got it, now everyone wants to revert back to Bungie after we claimed Bungie ruined Halo with the release of Reach. man we are finiky! I like Halo 4 and am glad it was changed because if it hadn’t been changed people would say it sucks because its the same halo game. we are never happy.
Agreed. I hated Halo Reach for its bad charecters, cannon breaking stort and just plain un-fun multi-player. I loved Halo 4’s story because it felt more mature, like 343 understands that after more than a decade of Halo the people who have been playing it since the beginning (which is most likely the majority of the fans) have grown up and matured and they wanted the game to mature with us. Dont believe me, try reading a couple of the books (prefferably Fall of Reach and Ghost of Onyx) and then play through the game again. Listen to what each charecter says both durring and outside cutscenes. If you listen closely the campain actually talks about philosiphy a lot, but its up to the player to decide if these moral questions are right or wrong. And that shows that 343 dont think we are all just a bunch of kids who want to blow stuff up, they achknowledge us as adults.
I think people are missing Bungie because Bungie probably would have never introduced things like perks and killstreaks and so on to Halo - although they made some incredibly silly decisions themselves, they never made any quite so silly as some of the ones 343 have made.
People felt as though Bungie had gotten bad and that 343 would be better; instead they feel as though 343 have simply proven themselves to be worse.