CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
Seriously -_-
I think a football field should expand to 200 yards and the goalposts should be thinner. The game of football needs to change and evolve!!
Change is not a bad thing. New ideas are always welcome but it seems that they are just taking Reach and updating it. Is there any confirmation on ranked playlists? And what the AAs gonna be in the game?
> CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
>
> Just saying
I’ve honestly never looked at it that way but its true. People love Halo because it’s Halo. The more we deviate away from that core idea, the less people begin to like it such as with what happened in Reach. Let’s not watch Halo 4 go down the same road but even further.
There’s nothing wrong with change as long as it’s good change.
> CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
>
> Just saying
Halo 2 and 3 changed from their respective predecessors and did very well.
> There’s nothing wrong with change as long as it’s good change.
Exactly.
Changing their game drastically is the absolute worst thing they can do. By keeping a game consistent, you develop and grow a core group of fans. CoD does this well. Halos 1-3 did this well. Sports do this well.
You can’t drastically alter the game’s core gameplay. That alienates all the original fans and destroys the community.
> > CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
> >
> > Just saying
>
> Halo 2 and 3 changed from their respective predecessors and did very well.
From Halo 2 to 3 there was NOT.
AA’s.
Bloom.
Random weapon spawns.
Instant player spawns.
See the difference?
You never replied to me in the last thread either.
Unfortunately, Halo’s in the position where it has to do /something/ different, even if it also went back to the Halo 2/3 roots. Halo started to falter from being King of the hill when MW hit, and fell from the very very top by the time MW2 hit. Releasing a game just like Halo 3 wouldn’t make it win out. Same (of course XD) with Reach.
Besides, CoD’s going to die before 2015 I’d almost dare reckon. It’s losing a lot of initiative and support slowly over the span of each game that’s released. They’re anticipated, but at the same time the CoD community (if that’s what you’d even call…it…?) is growing more and more dissatisfied.
People went to CoD because it was something fun, different, and new. Yet it did everything right. At least, the minute changes that made MW1 happen were enough to get everybody glancing over at CoD. Then MW2 came, and the horde was released. It’s time for Halo to make those changes that (not in the image of Reach, Gravemind forbid) inspire the gaming community to return to the true king.
> Unfortunately, Halo’s in the position where it has to do /something/ different, even if it also went back to the Halo 2/3 roots. Halo started to falter from being King of the hill when MW hit, and fell from the very very top by the time MW2 hit. Releasing a game just like Halo 3 wouldn’t make it win out. Same (of course XD) with Reach.
>
> Besides, CoD’s going to die before 2015 I’d almost dare reckon. It’s losing a lot of initiative and support slowly over the span of each game that’s released. They’re anticipated, but at the same time the CoD community (if that’s what you’d even call…it…?) is growing more and more dissatisfied.
>
> People went to CoD because it was something fun, different, and new. Yet it did everything right. At least, the minute changes that made MW1 happen were enough to get everybody glancing over at CoD. Then MW2 came, and the horde was released. It’s time for Halo to make those changes that (not in the image of Reach, Gravemind forbid) inspire the gaming community to return to the true king.
But if we went back to Halo 2/3 it wouldn’t be the same thing again. We had Reach in-between.
I’m still curious. While Master Chief was sleeping in cryo he suddenly learned how to sprint…
> > Unfortunately, Halo’s in the position where it has to do /something/ different, even if it also went back to the Halo 2/3 roots. Halo started to falter from being King of the hill when MW hit, and fell from the very very top by the time MW2 hit. Releasing a game just like Halo 3 wouldn’t make it win out. Same (of course XD) with Reach.
> >
> > Besides, CoD’s going to die before 2015 I’d almost dare reckon. It’s losing a lot of initiative and support slowly over the span of each game that’s released. They’re anticipated, but at the same time the CoD community (if that’s what you’d even call…it…?) is growing more and more dissatisfied.
> >
> > People went to CoD because it was something fun, different, and new. Yet it did everything right. At least, the minute changes that made MW1 happen were enough to get everybody glancing over at CoD. Then MW2 came, and the horde was released. It’s time for Halo to make those changes that (not in the image of Reach, Gravemind forbid) inspire the gaming community to return to the true king.
>
> But if we went back to Halo 2/3 it wouldn’t be the same thing again. We had Reach in-between.
That does not change the fact that Halo 3’s gameplay wasn’t enough to sustain its iron fist over CoD when CoD:MW became the new thing. While I support returning more to the core with Halo 4 than Halo Reach did, I also support them branching out. Halo 3’s forge. Halo 4’s SpecOps.
Plus, if you’ve been reading Frankie’s posts from NeoGaf, it sounds like we’re not really envisioning these things properly. IMO, I think I understand the weapon drops thing now and it sounds like a /good/ change. At first I was totally against it. We’ll just have to wait and see regardless.
Point and case- Halo 4 will have to bring in the changes Halo 2 or 3 did while being much more mindful to core gameplay than Reach was. The fact they’re not bringing in bloom is already a return to the core. Now all that’s left to see is how they impliment spawning, loadouts, AA’s, and all that. If the implimentations are good, they will not change the Halo core all that much. If they are bad… you get Reach.
> > > CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
> > >
> > > Just saying
> >
> > Halo 2 and 3 changed from their respective predecessors and did very well.
>
> From Halo 2 to 3 there was NOT.
> AA’s.
> Bloom.
> Random weapon spawns.
> Instant player spawns.
>
> See the difference?
>
> You never replied to me in the last thread either.
From Halo 1 to 2 we got:
- Dual Wielding
- Vehicle Jacking
- Fundamental changes to the workings of many weapons
- Vehicle destruction
- Melee lunch
- Regenerating health
- Increased jump height and movement
- New Weapons
From Halo 2 to 3 we got:
- Addition of equipment
- More alterations to movement and jump
- Turret on the tank no long in the the driver’s control
- Detachable turrets
- More major changes to weapons and vehicles
- Addition of many new weapons
See how my list is longer than you list?
Also: halo2sucks.com
> > > > CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
> > > >
> > > > Just saying
> > >
> > > Halo 2 and 3 changed from their respective predecessors and did very well.
> >
> > From Halo 2 to 3 there was NOT.
> > AA’s.
> > Bloom.
> > Random weapon spawns.
> > Instant player spawns.
> >
> > See the difference?
> >
> > You never replied to me in the last thread either.
>
> From Halo 1 to 2 we got:
> - Dual Wielding
> - Vehicle Jacking
> - Fundamental changes to the workings of many weapons
> - Vehicle destruction
> - Melee lunch
> - Regenerating health
> - Increased jump height and movement
> - New Weapons
>
> From Halo 2 to 3 we got:
> - Addition of equipment
> - More alterations to movement and jump
> - Turret on the tank no long in the the driver’s control
> - Detachable turrets
> - More major changes to weapons and vehicles
> - Addition of many new weapons
>
>
> See how my list is longer than you list?
>
> Also: halo2sucks.com
I simply shortened my list because things like movement speed alteration is not a core element of Halo.
I think regenerating health is the only thing you got going there.
I am really tired of seeing the words COD in the Halo forum, very annoying.
> > CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
> >
> > Just saying
>
> Halo 2 and 3 changed from their respective predecessors and did very well.
There is only so much you can change until you mess it all up. They’ve been playing jenga with the series and theyre pulling too many pieces.
> > > > > CoD seems to be doing the opposite and sitting quite well.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just saying
> > > >
> > > > Halo 2 and 3 changed from their respective predecessors and did very well.
> > >
> > > From Halo 2 to 3 there was NOT.
> > > AA’s.
> > > Bloom.
> > > Random weapon spawns.
> > > Instant player spawns.
> > >
> > > See the difference?
> > >
> > > You never replied to me in the last thread either.
> >
> > From Halo 1 to 2 we got:
> > - Dual Wielding
> > - Vehicle Jacking
> > - Vehicle destruction
> > - Melee lunch
> > - Regenerating health
> >
> >
> > From Halo 2 to 3 we got:
> > - Addition of equipment
> > - Turret on the tank no long in the the driver’s control
> > - Detachable turrets
> >
> >
> >
> > See how my list is longer than you list?
> >
> > Also: halo2sucks.com
>
> I simply shortened my list because things like movement speed alteration is not a core element of Halo.
> I think regenerating health is the only thing you got going there.
Okay, I’ve taken out anything about movement, jump height, new weapons and vehicles and changes to those. My Halo 2 list is still longer, and Halo 2 spawned one of the worst outcries against change Halo has ever seen. There was no “Halo3suck.com” or “HaloReachSuck.com” (let’s not get into http://haloreach.isnotcanon.net/).
In my eyes, core changes are things you’re forced to cope with or utilize. It applies primarily to the “average” player, and how he would perform with other “average players” if he chose not to use these things and they did:
CORE CHANGES/ALTERATIONS
H1-H2:
-Regenerating Health
-Jump height, movement
H2-H3:
-Jump height, movement
H3-Reach:
-Bloom
-Armor Abilities
-Jump height, movement
-Return of health
Everything else was not a core change. Why? Because a player could function just fine without utilizing the other changes. You could play just as well as anyone else if you chose not to dual wield or hijack. You could play just as well as anyone else if you chose not to use equipment.
Why AA’s and everything else on the core list is different? You’re /forced/ to utilize them. The average player will not be able to compete with other average players if he deprives himself of AA’s that everyone /starts/ with. The average player will be able to compete with others if he doesn’t use equipment, which everybody /doesn’t start/ with.