The Shortcomings of Halo: Reach and the Future of the Series
By Ricin Umbrella
A brief note about the author:
When it comes to Halo, one could consider my opinion biased. When I think of Halo, I think of its multiplayer aspect, not campaign. Halo 3 is my favorite game of the series, closely followed by Halo 2 and Halo: CE. This is also representative of the order in which I played them. I’m not particularly fond of Halo: Reach. Now without further delay, allow me to provide some background knowledge and explain this discrepancy before discussing Halo’s future.
I would like to think that there are three core areas that define the first three Halo games and set a precedent for the series to follow.
These are:
- Load Out Mechanics
- Spartan/Elite Traits & Weapon Mechanics
- Gameplay Flow & Overall Success
There are many more areas to be explored, but getting these three right is the foundation upon which any good addition to the franchise must be built.
Selectable load outs don’t belong in the competitive Halo universe. Halo 1, 2 and 3 multiplayer featured a definite load out based on the game type played. With this, there is no difference between any player’s respective weapon load out at spawn, and there are no built in armor abilities. This makes for a perfectly balanced (depending on the map being played) start and is the foundation to a fair game. This is the first thing that Reach got wrong; Selectable and varying load outs were made available to players at the start of nearly all competitive multiplayer playlists. This gave different weapons and armor abilities (I’ll go into more detail on that later) to each player. “What’s the problem with that?” You might ask. There are two problems that arise from this, the first being the fact that it has been done before a million times (Cough Call of Duty Cough). Need I say more? The second and most important fault is that it makes the game nearly impossible to balance. The equation is simple: The more variables that are added to the game, the more complex balancing it becomes. Who looks forward to playing an unbalanced Halo game, the only major Xbox 360 counterpart to the horrendously skewed Call of Duty and Battlefield franchises?
This leads to the very weapon traits and armor abilities aforementioned in the load out section. While this is a far from concise subject matter, it can generally be said that all weapons
found throughout the Halo saga’s multiplayer, including Reach, are balanced when applied in context. This does not justify the varied weapon load outs on spawn, and I am not going to delve into Reach’s new reticule bloom failure. So they got the weapons right in Reach – at least somewhat. But here is the kicker – remember those armor abilities that I mentioned? Many argue that they single handedly ruined Reach, and for good reason. Spawning with a jet pack, sprint, invisibility or invincibility (armor lock) completely throws out any chance that the already difficult task of balancing the weapon load outs had at succeeding. The entire framework of gameplay was suddenly changed behind the backs of Halo’s loyal fans, leading to much dismay. Ask any experienced Halo 2 or 3 player if they like the fact that practicing useful jumps, battling for “invis”, and swiftly fleeing from engagements on the fly is obsolete in the wake of armor abilities. No. That is the answer you will get. And if you can’t figure out which armor abilities take the liberty of replacing those cornerstone gameplay aspects, I will leave you with the pleasure of figuring it out. I could write a novel concerning armor abilities’ negative impact on the game, but I must digress. So Bungie crapped the bed on that one. I’m not condemning anyone, but their response to the armor ability issue is at best partial. Would you consider a few play lists with armor ability refinements an end-all solution? I wouldn’t.
So how does all of this tie into Reach’s gameplay flow and overall success? As far as the gameplay goes, one word comes to mind: Disappointing. Having played Halo: CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3, Reach had me questioning if its origins were really the same of those other masterpieces. I, like so many others, once associated the Halo title with skill induced fun that was addictive for all the right reasons. I am sad to say that this long-lived association was crushed with the advent of Reach. Imbalanced armor abilities, most notably armor lock, and the previously mentioned flaws turned the game into less of a fun battle, and more of a battle against frustration. And I am not alone. Much of the Halo community has experienced this, and it has not been without its consequences. MLG Halo, once prominent during the days of Halo 2 and 3 has receded from the entertainment industry’s spotlight, despite drastic and specific changes to MLG game types, including the removal of reticule bloom, load out armor abilities, and refinement of weapon load outs to the “Designated Marksman Rifle” (a widely resented replacement to the “Battle Rifle” that I will not go into detail about).
Disheartening, right? Let’s talk a little bit about the success of Halo: Reach in comparison to the second and third installments in the franchise. Halo 3 sold the most copies of
any Halo game, reaching over 8.1 million games sold less than two years after its release, edging out Halo 2’s reigning position atop the charts of Xbox game sales at 8.0 million. Halo: Reach sold an impressive 5 million copies over a year and a half lifespan, but failed to “Reach” that magic 8 million mark. Straying from the idea that Reach sold fewer copies than its brethren, it was still a resounding success. But there is one striking trait that sets Reach apart from its predecessors. Reach redesigned Halo in an attempt to attract a wider audience. Halo 2 and 3 were successful enough, so why wouldn’t Bungie follow the same framework with Reach? The answer is simple. The market was thought to be stale and Reach’s radical and new additions to the Halo universe were intended to appeal to a wider audience than previous games, most notably the “Call of Duty” community. Bungie simply wanted to maximize profits and end their long relationship with Microsoft on a good note. And who’s to blame them? But the new strategy including so many foreign concepts to the Halo franchise simply didn’t work as intended. Of course people were allured by the idea of armor abilities, radical gameplay changes and a new implementation of Firefight as well as “Forge World”. After all was said and done, however, the core halo fans that comprise the majority of the community were left uninterested in the game and consequently left Reach. It is no wonder Reach’s multiplayer has had the most significant drop in population over time when compared to Halo: CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3.