Don't ruin my Halo game. I LOVE HALO

This goes out to every dink that wants to ruin Halo by saying MAKE SOEMTHING NEW!

The problem with that statement is easily fixed…have you ever thought of playing a different franchise?

Personally I think for Halo 4 to be good IT MUST have the original fundamentals…unlike Reach.

Look at game sequals back in the day…THEY WERE EASILY AMAZING. No one ever expected them to be bad because they knew they were getting what they wanted. Mario games hardly changed…Doom games hardly changed…maybe new campaign/weapons/maps? but they kept the original GAMEPLAY. This is exactly why Call of Duty is winning…

Thank you for your time I think I proved my point.

343 has already confirmed they’re adding new mechanics :stuck_out_tongue:

> Personally I think for Halo 4 to be good IT MUST have the original fundamentals…unlike Reach.
>
> Look at game sequals back in the day…THEY WERE EASILY AMAZING. No one ever expected them to be bad because they knew they were getting what they wanted. Mario games hardly changed…Doom games hardly changed…maybe new campaign/weapons/maps? but they kept the original GAMEPLAY. This is exactly why Call of Duty is winning…

Yes :),

If 343 are clever they will make Halo 4 like the previous games everyone loved to bits and sold incredibly well, I’m talking about Halo 1,2,3. Don’t worry I’m not one those people screaming, “i want another Halo 3”. Yes, i/we want new content in the coming games but people seem to be losing the grasp of ‘new’ in sequels. It means subtle additions not completely different gameplay and mechanics. Sorry for name dropping but ‘Gears of War’ has done this very well, not much has changed through 1-3 but they have all been brilliant games.

343, keep it simple and you, we’ll be fine.

> > Personally I think for Halo 4 to be good IT MUST have the original fundamentals…unlike Reach.
> >
> > Look at game sequals back in the day…THEY WERE EASILY AMAZING. No one ever expected them to be bad because they knew they were getting what they wanted. Mario games hardly changed…Doom games hardly changed…maybe new campaign/weapons/maps? but they kept the original GAMEPLAY. This is exactly why Call of Duty is winning…
>
> Yes :),
>
> If 343 are clever they will make Halo 4 like the previous games everyone loved to bits and sold incredibly well, I’m talking about Halo 1,2,3. Don’t worry I’m not one those people screaming, “i want another Halo 3”. Yes, i/we want new content in the coming games but people seem to be losing the grasp of ‘new’ in sequels. It means subtle additions not completely different gameplay and mechanics. Sorry for name dropping but ‘Gears of War’ has done this very well, not much has changed through 1-3 but they have all been brilliant games.
>
> 343, keep it simple and you, we’ll be fine.

Can this be!?!? Somebody reasonable?!?!?Gasp

> 343 has already confirmed they’re adding new mechanics :stuck_out_tongue:

omfg…i probably wont even buy it then…the only fun halo game to play now that has online is halo 3 : /

Quake 1-4 had DIFFERENT CAMPAIGNS, but the multiplayer was always the same but with new maps that everyone loved. 343 should take a lesson…because right now copying other games and putting in a halo game makes it go down the poopa.

The only reason Quake has really failed is because people lost interest…

That has kinda happend with Halo: Reach…you know why? because bungie copied other modern day shooters and ruined what they originally had in mind.

> Can this be!?!? Somebody reasonable?!?!?Gasp

Yes, a rare sighting i know :slight_smile:

LegacyXx i can’t tell if your actually being sarcastic?

I understood your point with bring back a more traditional Halo, its what i want swell :slight_smile: But these new mechanics being thrown around, we don’t even know what or how big or small they are yet. You can;t say you won’t buy a game because someone told you something on a forum and based on 1 trailer and few bits of concept art. Im not saying what you should or shouldn’t buy but at this stage we have no say in how the game will turn out based on the incredibly small amount of information given.

> > Can this be!?!? Somebody reasonable?!?!?Gasp
>
> Yes, a rare sighting i know :slight_smile:
>
> LegacyXx i can’t tell if your actually being sarcastic?
>
> I understood your point with bring back a more traditional Halo, its what i want swell :slight_smile: But these new mechanics being thrown around, we don’t even know what or how big or small they are yet. You can;t say you won’t buy a game because someone told you something on a forum and based on 1 trailer and few bits of concept art. Im not saying what you should or shouldn’t buy but at this stage we have no say in how the game will turn out based on the incredibly small amount of information given.

That’s true, but Halo seems to get worse after each sequel/prequel. They just keep changing more and more. Straying further away from it’s original fundamentals which made it ‘fun’.

> > 343 has already confirmed they’re adding new mechanics :stuck_out_tongue:
>
> omfg…i probably wont even buy it then…the only fun halo game to play now that has online is halo 3 : /
>
> Quake 1-4 had DIFFERENT CAMPAIGNS, but the multiplayer was always the same but with new maps that everyone loved. 343 should take a lesson…because right now copying other games and putting in a halo game makes it go down the poopa.
>
> The only reason Quake has really failed is because people lost interest…
>
> That has kinda happend with Halo: Reach…you know why? because bungie copied other modern day shooters and ruined what they originally had in mind.

Halo 1 & 2 still have online play (on PC) =/

> That’s true, but Halo seems to get worse after each sequel/prequel. They just keep changing more and more. Straying further away from it’s original fundamentals which made it ‘fun’.

Yes i understand,

I think developers and game companies are actually being too lenient these days if I’m honest. Listing to the community is great and all, its essential for the company to stay afloat and continue to make great games but how much is too much? A lot of the feedback given on games such as Halo isn’t really that productive and evidently useful. I don’t like to point fingers or start a conflict but there is essentially to many individuals from the younger age group who moan/scream/abuse and demand for content and changes without even building a substantial point of case for it. I guess what I’m saying is 343 need to really filter what they listen to and definitely what they take on board from us, i wish we could all give appropriate feedback but thats never going to happen in such a complex community.

343 are now in charge, Bungie were amazing but its nearly time when we set off to another horizon.

> > > 343 has already confirmed they’re adding new mechanics :stuck_out_tongue:
> >
> > omfg…i probably wont even buy it then…the only fun halo game to play now that has online is halo 3 : /
> >
> > Quake 1-4 had DIFFERENT CAMPAIGNS, but the multiplayer was always the same but with new maps that everyone loved. 343 should take a lesson…because right now copying other games and putting in a halo game makes it go down the poopa.
> >
> > The only reason Quake has really failed is because people lost interest…
> >
> > That has kinda happend with Halo: Reach…you know why? because bungie copied other modern day shooters and ruined what they originally had in mind.
>
> Halo 1 & 2 still have online play (on PC) =/

with a total of 100 players! lmao no really though…it’s hurtin and so is halo 3.

I’m also surprised you didn’t tell me that there was XBC for halo 2? with a total of 4 players.

I don’t mind if they add Halo 2 and 3 style (duel weilding, boarding, theater, forge, more weapons) what I don’t really like is when they replace a lot of stuff (bloom etc.)

I am looking forward to what ever 343 do as long as they don’t continue with the strange Mason symbolism past Halo games had (bar perhaps Reach).

Irony: Every main Halo installment introduced something new to the franchise and changed features from past installments.

Also, if Halo 3 is such a god game, why don’t more people play it?

like how the idea of “Bloom” doesn’t really belong in a Halo game. Same thing goes for sprint…

> Irony: Every main Halo installment introduced something new to the franchise and changed features from past installments.
>
> Also, if Halo 3 is such a god game, why don’t more people play it?

I don’t know Einstein, could it have something to do with it being out for three years? Awful netcode?

If Halo Reach is so awesome why is it number 6, behind FIFA lolololololol.

Your response will be, Because Halo is not “it” anymore. But maybe Reach is not “Halo” hmmmmmm?

What “belongs in Halo”?

> Irony: Every main Halo installment introduced something new to the franchise and changed features from past installments.
>
> Also, if Halo 3 is such a god game, why don’t more people play it?

Halo 2 is better…Halo 3 is just a slowed down/less fun version of it.

> Also, if Halo 3 is such a god game, why don’t more people play it?

In my opinion,

People feel they have to play and be part of the most recent and contemporary game at the present time. Yes, there are those few who still stick to what they love regardless of time and age, but this is the general population and casual player who make up the numbers. (Applied specifically to Halo 3)

> > Irony: Every main Halo installment introduced something new to the franchise and changed features from past installments.
> >
> > Also, if Halo 3 is such a god game, why don’t more people play it?
>
> I don’t know Einstein, could it have something to do with it being out for three years? Awful netcode?
>
> If Halo Reach is so awesome why is it number 6, behind FIFA lolololololol.
>
> Your response will be, Because Halo is not “it” anymore. But maybe Reach is not “Halo” hmmmmmm?

Halo 2 was still being played up until it’s death. CoD 4 is still on the top 20 list, too. The game being out for 3 years doesn’t mean anything. Older games are still being played.

I still don’t get why people keep bringing up FIFA. Football (soccer) is popular world-wide, much more so than Halo.

Also, Halo had it’s time as king. And Halo: Reach is as “Halo” as Halo: C.E., 2, 3, ODST, and Wars are.

If I wanted to play a no longer supported game. It wouldn’t be Halo 3 LOL or CoD 4 …

IMO CoD 4 was the worst thing that ever happend to modern day FPS’s…they are simply just not fun…people just like CoD because it’s easy. But now EVERY friggin FPS out there has ADS/iron sight and SPRINT wtf it’s getting old…fast. Because of this every FPS’s now plays like CoD… :frowning: so boring AND EASY. For actual gamers…like me…it’s not nice/fun and i’m actually getting board of video games…hell must have frozen over.

oh and free kills all around lmfao…makes me sick…

> What “belongs in Halo”?

It is not a question of what belongs in Halo, but where Halo belongs. On the top. If every other Halo game was doing something right, then reach did some things very wrong. You defend the game because you like it, ignoring attrition and strongly being subjective.

It is wise to look inwards when you fail, not blame everyone else. If Reach was a good game it would be on top like the previous games. It certainly sold enough copies however the attrition tells us people feel they did NOT get what the paid for, a Halo game.