H4 review analyses: 343i’s challenges for H5

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

Out of pure curiosity I (re-)read about 25+ reviews for H4 beginning with the lowest scores (basis: Metacritic).

It was really fascinating to compare past perspectives with today’s discussions in the H5 board.

I would like to take these impressions as a starting point for further discussions: What are the main challenges 343i has to overcome to make H5 another critically acclaimed Halo title?

1.) Too familiar (aka series fatigue)
The overarching point of criticism (found in almost every review) was that H4 felt too similar to previous Halo titles (especially the campaign). The overall consensus was that 343i played it too safe as if they were afraid to alienate the existing fanbase. While most editors had understanding for 343i’s special role it also became apparent that this ‘stagnation’ wouldn’t be tolerated in hindsight to H5.
While campaign was almost universally criticized for not taking any risks it was ironically the changes to the multiplayer portion that got the most praise.

> Telegraph.co.uk
> The good news is Halo 4 is Halo as we know and love it. The not so good news is … Halo 4 is really Halo as we know and love it.
> Rather than re-inventing the series in their image, 343 has treated Halo 4 with kid gloves, settling for familiarity and mimicry of what has gone before. A reassurance to long-term fans, rather than a battle cry that one of gaming’s biggest blockbusters is there for the re-crafting. It’s not an unreasonable approach for your first time out; there are loyalists to appease and concerns to address. Change too much and you can lose the converted, but change too little and you risk being left behind.

> The Guardian
> In games, innovation and pushing the envelope are practically required, as well as expected. So how does a developer put their personal stamp on this kind of game? In other words, how much innovation is there room for in the creative process, when the game one is working on is Halo 4?

What this means for H5: A ‘best of Halo’ won’t cut it for H5’s campaign anymore. H4 got a free card for being 343i’s first game but now the studio must prove that they can really innovate on their own. It’s an uphill battle against an increasing series fatigue as more and more people question the new trilogy’s right to exist. The cry for a ‘fresh experience’ is probably the single most important challenge for H5 – and it isn’t limited to campaign alone.

2.) Refusal to go with the times VS conserving the ‘Halo feeling’
While many reviews emphasized the similarities to ‘modern’ shooters this was deemed (contrary to most of the discussions in this board) a long overdue step by many editors:

> Digitalspy
> Combined with the long-awaited introduction of sprinting as a permanent ability, and that most new weaponry tends to be rapid-fire in nature, it means that combat generally feels faster-paced and more exciting, yet still offers that distinctive and remarkably tactile Halo feel.

While most editors agreed that it was a good mix of the old Halo formula with ‘modern’ mechanics there were some outlets that felt it didn’t go far enough:

> Gamesradar
> The addition of sprinting is helpful, but you’ll likely wish it was joined by iron sights, at least for some of the awesome new guns you’ll pick up. It’s not that it’s necessary–far from it–but with so many other elements shifting forward it feels out of place when zooming in on a pistol changes the entire screen.

> EGM
> These low points are openly exacerbated by the series’ staunch refusal to get with the times when it comes to game mechanics and level design, ignoring obvious enhancements like big-ticket sequences and proper iron-sights mechanics […] it’s a lot to ask of us who play other games in the genre to continue to stomach a core most left behind half a decade ago.

What that means for H5: While many diehard Halo fans might expressly disagree with this notion it’s pretty obvious that there is pressure to ‘modernize’ the franchise not only from ‘casuals’ but from a wider audience of gaming enthusiasts. The underlying problem is that some features (Sprint, ADS) are so common in FPS (there is practically no console FPS left that strays from that) that some people regard these as essential, as a minimum requirement that every shooter has to meet. This is a source of conflict that will accompany us in Halo’s future and it’s a challenge 343i can only ‘solve’ by finding a sensible middle ground that is supported by as many people as possible.

3.) Great narrative approach, so-so execution

Almost all reviews were full of praise fort 343i’s attempt to tell a more mature, multilayered and human story in H5.

> Gamespot
> 343 Industries delivers a compelling narrative on both an intimate and a grand scale, with a satisfying conclusion that will make you excited for what’s to come.
>
> Halo 4 is a striking step up in storytelling for the series

Editors however had mixed feelings towards the execution. While the overall quality of the cut scenes and the improved facial expressions were applauded, there was also criticism for the lacking integration of important information (story videos via Waypoint) and the anticlimactic finale.

What that means for H5: 343i’s eagerness to put Halo’s characters and universe in the spotlight is both a strong growth opportunity for the franchise and an important differentiating factor. 343i would be clever to play by their strengths and learn from their mistakes in H4.
If they manage to pull that off in H5 we’re in for an amazing experience.

4.) Technical prowess
From graphics to sound effects, there was a lot of praise for 343i’s technical skills. Some editors were baffled that such an achievement was even possible on the aging 360-hardware, many pointing out that a Halo studio was finally able to compete with the biggest names in the industry.

What that means for H5: H4’s strong offering is both a reason for hope and a huge liability. Especially in the graphics department there is a room for disappointment as expectations are high especially with the new hardware in mind.

2

This is -Yoink-. Yes Halo 4 got good reviews but the game was a joke. Reviews don’t mean -Yoink-, the best way to sell a game is through word of mouth. What the majority of the community (from what I have seen from polls and forums) is a “classic Halo experience”. The further 343 try to “modernize” the franchise the more Halo will die.

This read is actually disgusting. EGM asking for iron sights. These reviewers know nothing about Halo or the community and all it seems like is 343 have listen to the reviewers from Halo 4 leading to a huge rift in the community.

If Halo 5 got bad reviews 3/10 for the main reason being “it’s too traditional” the majority of the community would be happy. The game would sell great because I would make all my mates get it. But at the moment no matter what Halo 5 reviews get only one out of eight original Halo fans is getting the game on release date.

3

Critic reviews may or may not mean anything. I checked out the Metacritic score myself. Whilst the critical reviews for Halo 4, and COD had good critical reviews, the user reviews for Halo 4 were mixed [6.9]–whilst COD Black Ops, Black Ops 2 and Advanced Warfare have had negative user reviews of below 5, depending on the platform.

Well, the critics have their own opinions–the players typically give random scores of zero and 10, so they may as well have given a thumbs up/thumbs option instead of an actual score for the users.

Halo needs to stand on its own two feet. In my personal opinion, they are focusing too much on the multiplayer. If they focus on delivering a fantastic campaign and sandbox, then I think the multiplayer will take care of itself.

Actually, if the community can’t --yoinking-- make up their minds on what they want out of Halo MP, then 343 industries may as well just give us Campaign, Firefight, Forge/Custom Games and Theater, and leave the fans to --yoink-- around with the matchmaking themselves.

4

> 2533274850926786;2:
> This is -Yoink-. Yes Halo 4 got good reviews but the game was a joke. Reviews don’t mean -Yoink-, the best way to sell a game is through word of mouth. What the majority of the community (from what I have seen from polls and forums) is a “classic Halo experience”. The further 343 try to “modernize” the franchise the more Halo will die.
>
> This read is actually disgusting. EGM asking for iron sights. These reviewers know nothing about Halo or the community and all it seems like is 343 have listen to the reviewers from Halo 4 leading to a huge rift in the community.
>
> If Halo 5 got bad reviews 3/10 for the main reason being “it’s too traditional” the majority of the community would be happy. The game would sell great because I would make all my mates get it. But at the moment no matter what Halo 5 reviews get only one out of eight original Halo fans is getting the game on release date.

Saying that reviews mean nothing is as deluded as saying that reviews are all that matters.
Even if you disagree with some opinions the 87 reviews in average show a pretty good picture of the general mood at that point in time.
I don’t get the hate for editors either. Most of these people are gaming enthusiasts just as you and me (why else would they choose to write about games for a living?).

On average they are better informed and know more about the industry in general than the vast majority of people that plays videogames.
That doesn’t mean that the hardcore fanbase isn’t even better informed, but you don’t have to be hyper hardcore to voice your opinion - Halo is a 9 million seller, a mass market not some niche product.

I’ve been working for a Halo fanpage and as an editor for different online magazines (as a freelancer) and I can tell you that a Halo review is always something special. It’s either the most experienced or the most passionate person who is allowed to write the review but it’s always an honor.

Most of these people are probably not what you would call ‘hardcore Halo fans’ but it’s very unlikely that they didn’t play all (or most) of the Halos before.

Don’t forget when these reviews were written either.

This hate on ‘the others’ has to stop. It’s either the ‘casuals’, the ‘COD-crowd’ or the reviewers who are to blame.
The sad part is that all these people you are talking about play and buy Halo games.

You disagree?
Fine but don’t insult others just because they see things differently.

5

> 2533274793332039;4:
> > 2533274850926786;2:
> > This is -Yoink-. Yes Halo 4 got good reviews but the game was a joke. Reviews don’t mean -Yoink-, the best way to sell a game is through word of mouth. What the majority of the community (from what I have seen from polls and forums) is a “classic Halo experience”. The further 343 try to “modernize” the franchise the more Halo will die.
> >
> > This read is actually disgusting. EGM asking for iron sights. These reviewers know nothing about Halo or the community and all it seems like is 343 have listen to the reviewers from Halo 4 leading to a huge rift in the community.
> >
> > If Halo 5 got bad reviews 3/10 for the main reason being “it’s too traditional” the majority of the community would be happy. The game would sell great because I would make all my mates get it. But at the moment no matter what Halo 5 reviews get only one out of eight original Halo fans is getting the game on release date.
>
>
> Saying that reviews mean nothing is as deluded as saying that reviews are all that matters.
> Even if you disagree with some opinions the 87 reviews in average show a pretty good picture of the general mood at that point in time.
> I don’t get the hate for editors either. Most of these people are gaming enthusiasts just as you and me (why else would they choose to write about games for a living?).
>
> On average they are better informed and know more about the industry in general than the vast majority of people that plays videogames.
> That doesn’t mean that the hardcore fanbase isn’t even better informed, but you don’t have to be hyper hardcore to voice your opinion - Halo is a 9 million seller, a mass market not some niche product.
>
> I’ve been working for a Halo fanpage and as an editor for different online magazines (as a freelancer) and I can tell you that a Halo review is always something special. It’s either the most experienced or the most passionate person who is allowed to write the review but it’s always an honor.
>
> Most of these people are probably not what you would call ‘hardcore Halo fans’ but it’s very unlikely that they didn’t play all (or most) of the Halos before.
>
> Don’t forget when these reviews were written either.
>
> This hate on ‘the others’ has to stop. It’s either the ‘casuals’, the ‘COD-crowd’ or the reviewers who are to blame.
> The sad part is that all these people you are talking about play and buy Halo games.
>
> You disagree?
> Fine but don’t insult others just because they see things differently.

You don’t think he has a point? These reviewers give Halo 4 near-perfect scores, all while the core fanbase is sharpening their proverbial pitch forks and the casuals are dropping the game in droves (over 80% population decline in under two months from release), all of this, and you can’t see the disconnect between the people who play a game for the sake of writing a review, the people who play because the next COD doesn’t come out for another two weeks, and those who play out of passion?

6

> 2533274870958311;5:
> > 2533274793332039;4:
> > > 2533274850926786;2:
> > > This is -Yoink-. Yes Halo 4 got good reviews but the game was a joke. Reviews don’t mean -Yoink-, the best way to sell a game is through word of mouth. What the majority of the community (from what I have seen from polls and forums) is a “classic Halo experience”. The further 343 try to “modernize” the franchise the more Halo will die.
> > >
> > > This read is actually disgusting. EGM asking for iron sights. These reviewers know nothing about Halo or the community and all it seems like is 343 have listen to the reviewers from Halo 4 leading to a huge rift in the community.
> > >
> > > If Halo 5 got bad reviews 3/10 for the main reason being “it’s too traditional” the majority of the community would be happy. The game would sell great because I would make all my mates get it. But at the moment no matter what Halo 5 reviews get only one out of eight original Halo fans is getting the game on release date.
> >
> >
> >
> > Saying that reviews mean nothing is as deluded as saying that reviews are all that matters.
> > Even if you disagree with some opinions the 87 reviews in average show a pretty good picture of the general mood at that point in time.
> > I don’t get the hate for editors either. Most of these people are gaming enthusiasts just as you and me (why else would they choose to write about games for a living?).
> >
> > On average they are better informed and know more about the industry in general than the vast majority of people that plays videogames.
> > That doesn’t mean that the hardcore fanbase isn’t even better informed, but you don’t have to be hyper hardcore to voice your opinion - Halo is a 9 million seller, a mass market not some niche product.
> >
> > I’ve been working for a Halo fanpage and as an editor for different online magazines (as a freelancer) and I can tell you that a Halo review is always something special. It’s either the most experienced or the most passionate person who is allowed to write the review but it’s always an honor.
> >
> > Most of these people are probably not what you would call ‘hardcore Halo fans’ but it’s very unlikely that they didn’t play all (or most) of the Halos before.
> >
> > Don’t forget when these reviews were written either.
> >
> > This hate on ‘the others’ has to stop. It’s either the ‘casuals’, the ‘COD-crowd’ or the reviewers who are to blame.
> > The sad part is that all these people you are talking about play and buy Halo games.
> >
> > You disagree?
> > Fine but don’t insult others just because they see things differently.
>
>
> You don’t think he has a point? These reviewers give Halo 4 near-perfect scores, all while the core fanbase is sharpening their proverbial pitch forks and the casuals are dropping the game in droves (over 80% population decline in under two months from release), all of this, and you can’t see the disconnect between the people who play a game for the sake of writing a review, the people who play because the next COD doesn’t come out for another two weeks, and those who play out of passion?

Must be nice to have everything so black and white. Reviewers, cod-people, true halo fans, casuals… Cater individual people into different groups and give each of those groups one single agenda.
Hardcore halo fans, as you define them, can’t keep halo up and running . Casual players are those who actually bring in the money that makes all of this possible and worthwhile for the developers. Massive majority of people who made H3 a success have never even glanced in the direction of these forums.

People who are “playing out of passion” as you call them bring nothing to this series except for baseless entitlement.

The term “vocal minority” exists for a reason. Those who are happy see no reason to complain. Halo 4 sold how many milloin copies again? That group of complainers is pretty insignificant in comparison.

7

Just ask yourself this question: When have these reviews been written?

Most of these were published way before the masses started playing – most of these editors had no chance to estimate the longevity of the game and they could have impossibly foreseen all the factors that led to the sharp decline in population.

It wasn’t the gameplay alone: General series fatigue (+ general fatigue at the end of a console generation), diverse mismanagements (Boltshot fiasco, DLC dilemma, overdue changes too slow,…) and the lack of a compelling incentive system (ranks,…) played their part too.

Most know-it-alls are just clever in retrospect. It’s easy to judge others if you had years to observe and analyze a certain situation.

The problem that reviews get out too soon is an old one – but that doesn’t make all editors incompetent.

If you actually read these you’ll notice that 80-90% of their points of criticism are congruent with those of the hardcore community.

The main difference is that most reviews are well-balanced and polite – while the hardcore fans are much more emotional and thus (sometimes) unreasonably harsh.

Many people in this board are simply in denial that there are dedicated players who enjoy Halo but still want Sprint/ADS-mechanics in the game. If you don’t share the same mindset there’s an instant devaluation (‘casual’ - ‘CoD-player’) or outright hate.

8

> 2533274963840114;6:
> > 2533274870958311;5:
> > > 2533274793332039;4:
> > > > 2533274850926786;2:
> > > > This is -Yoink-. Yes Halo 4 got good reviews but the game was a joke. Reviews don’t mean -Yoink-, the best way to sell a game is through word of mouth. What the majority of the community (from what I have seen from polls and forums) is a “classic Halo experience”. The further 343 try to “modernize” the franchise the more Halo will die.
> > > >
> > > > This read is actually disgusting. EGM asking for iron sights. These reviewers know nothing about Halo or the community and all it seems like is 343 have listen to the reviewers from Halo 4 leading to a huge rift in the community.
> > > >
> > > > If Halo 5 got bad reviews 3/10 for the main reason being “it’s too traditional” the majority of the community would be happy. The game would sell great because I would make all my mates get it. But at the moment no matter what Halo 5 reviews get only one out of eight original Halo fans is getting the game on release date.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The term “vocal minority” exists for a reason. Those who are happy see no reason to complain. Halo 4 sold how many milloin copies again? That group of complainers is pretty insignificant in comparison.

Yes, and as I’ve already pointed out, your ‘silent majority’ lost all interest in Halo 4 a mere two months after launch: the ‘modernized’ iterration of Halo failed to keep the interest of both the casual and hardcore players. The game sold great, but that’s to be expected from Microsofts’ flagship franchise.

9

> 2533274793332039;4:
> Saying that reviews mean nothing is as deluded as saying that reviews are all that matters.
> Even if you disagree with some opinions the 87 reviews in average show a pretty good picture of the general mood at that point in time.
> I don’t get the hate for editors either. Most of these people are gaming enthusiasts just as you and me (why else would they choose to write about games for a living?).
>
> I’ve been working for a Halo fanpage and as an editor for different online magazines (as a freelancer) and I can tell you that a Halo review is always something special. It’s either the most experienced or the most passionate person who is allowed to write the review but it’s always an honor.
>
> Most of these people are probably not what you would call ‘hardcore Halo fans’ but it’s very unlikely that they didn’t play all (or most) of the Halos before.
>
> Don’t forget when these reviews were written either.

I bolded all of those points, because you worded them as if you planned to discredit what was said in these reviews with those statements, but oddly enough, you seem to be defending them…

Or at least that’s what it sounds like…

> What this means for H5:
>
> A ‘best of Halo’ won’t cut it for H5’s campaign anymore. H4 got a free card for being 343i’s first game but now the studio must prove that they can really innovate on their own. It’s an uphill battle against an increasing series fatigue as more and more people question the new trilogy’s right to exist. The cry for a ‘fresh experience’ is probably the single most important challenge for H5 – and it isn’t limited to campaign alone.
>
> 2.) Refusal to go with the times VS conserving the ‘Halo feeling’
> While many reviews emphasized the similarities to ‘modern’ shooters this was deemed (contrary to most of the discussions in this board) a long overdue step by many editors:
>
> While many diehard Halo fans might expressly disagree with this notion it’s pretty obvious that there is pressure to ‘modernize’ the franchise not only from ‘casuals’ but from a wider audience of gaming enthusiasts. The underlying problem is that some features (Sprint, ADS) are so common in FPS (there is practically no console FPS left that strays from that) that some people regard these as essential, as a minimum requirement that every shooter has to meet. This is a source of conflict that will accompany us in Halo’s future and it’s a challenge 343i can only ‘solve’ by finding a sensible middle ground that is supported by as many people as possible.

Again, it really sounds like you’re defending these reviews.

Both Halo 2 and 3 were released to a generation that didn’t just want, but expected Sprint and aim down sights in first-person shooters as well. That is no different for Halo 5. The misconception here, is not so much that you’re saying the market has changed since then, but that you’re saying the market has changed THAT much since then.

Halo did in fact, develop a niche as a result of refusing to ‘modernize’ (a buzzword as far as I’m concerned.) If Halo 2 and 3 are any indication, it happens to be a fairly large one.

That niche still exists today, believe it or not, because those millions of ‘diehard Halo fans’ didn’t come from thin air.

Even if Halo 5 failed to modernize and attract new fans, making past Halo players return in the process would STILL result in a higher population than the final Halo 5. Yes, it is that many people. Sales will still be fairly high. Those ‘past Halo players’ are still buying new Halo games (judging by Halo 4’s great sales.) The problem is that they aren’t playing them.

In light of this, I’d argue to appease them instead.

> On average they are better informed and know more about the industry in general than the vast majority of people that plays videogames.
> That doesn’t mean that the hardcore fanbase isn’t even better informed, but you don’t have to be hyper hardcore to voice your opinion - Halo is a 9 million seller, a mass market not some niche product.

It’s an Xbox exclusive, and is the only console tactical shooter to offer Arena gameplay and long kill times. That’s a niche.

That alone can, and will deter the majority of people that enjoy twitch shooters. Contrary to popular belief, the ‘Halo feeling’ is not a buzzword in that regard.

10

> PolyGoner
> I bolded all of those points, because you worded them as if you planned to discredit what was said in these reviews with those statements, but oddly enough, you seem to be defending them…

I think you’re reading too much into my words.
You have to take these reviews for what they are – a snapshot in time. I pointed out these aspects because there was a lot of instant hate for the editors/reviews which isn’t warranted if you know when these have been published. I’ve read a lot of hardcore Halo fans saying that they actually liked H4’s MP offerings at first but learnt how broken (or ‘non-Halo’) the system is the more they played.
I’m pretty sure the scores would have been lower if most of these reviews weren’t published so early.

But that doesn’t change the fact that there are dedicated gamers who want Sprint/ADS in Halo. I don’t even know what your problem is because all I did was portraying these very different mindsets.

Seriously I’m sick and tired of these tiresome Sprint/ADS debates. It is just one of many points in my post – and I included it because I thought it was interesting because of the contrast to today’s discussions.
This is not a thread about whether or not H4 deserved it’s scores either – it’s about challenges in hindsight to H5.

Uninspired campaign that felt too similar to previous Halo titles?
General series fatigue?
Satisfying different needs when it comes to gameplay mechanics?
How to bring a promising narrative to the next level?
Danger of disappointment in regards to expectations and graphical showcase?

There is no discussion in this board anymore – it’s just the same people coming into every thread spreading their same agenda over and over and over again…
Yes we know that you hate these mechanics, yes we know that you envision a pure Halo future that will prove how right you were all the time… please for the mother of god can we talk about something else for a change?

I’m even willing to exclude these heretic points from my initial post if it troubles you so much!

11

Good job cherry picking the 5 reviews that back up your bias viewpoint lol.

12

When I read the reviews you picked up, it just gives me the impression that these people are sheeps that want everything to be standardized according to their own comfort zone, that’s pretty sad coming from “pro” reviewers.

13

Disregarding the (positive or negative) criticism towards the game(s), the opinion, and eventually the expectation towards the product, that to be innovative and modern you have to abandon and replace defining, valued and liked characteristics or to thoughtlessly follow the currently popular trends is just plain absurd.

Actual innovation doesn’t cause „riots“ or meets aversion since it is the process of introducing something new what improves either some specific established element or the established experience as a whole.
Now a (thought)provoking question is if Halo has ever experienced such kind of innovations or if the developers were more or less just playing around with things after CE and either hit or missed?

However, the actual current question that should be addressed to Halo is not „how much can you innovate“ but „how much and how often can you change a game’s established characteristics into something different before you are met with critical aversion because people do not recognize the game’s character they once favorited in the new title anymore or even do consider it qualitative inferior as an experience“, because that is exactly what has been happening with Halo.

Seriously, H4 (excluding story) and H5’s beta did not innovate anything. The „new stuff“ in that games isn’t the result of taking inspiration of established ideas and concept (be it out of old Halos or any other game) and refining and improving them to form something new, unique and better.
The „new stuff“ is the result of a lack of inspiration and progress and simply following the current modern and popular trends, what on the one hand led to stagnation and fatigue while on the other gave popular characteristics of Halo a 180° change.

In addition, just because this statement annoys me, mechanics like sprint, ads, etc. are not across-the-board innovations in FPS gameplay. Calling FPS gameplay with sprint innovative and FPS gameplay without sprint unprogressive is like calling automatic shifting innovative and manual shifting unprogressive.
You implement a mechanic like sprint in the context and concept of designing a certain kind of gameplay just like you implement an automatic gearbox to design a certain class of car (i.e. a model that focuses on city comfort and traffic).
Honestly, when people argue for such implementations in Halo than I think they do not argue for Halo being innovative but just for being different than it was and more similar to the rest.

14

> 2533274793332039;10:
> There is no discussion in this board anymore – it’s just the same people coming into every thread spreading their same agenda over and over and over again…
>
> Yes we know that you hate these mechanics, yes we know that you envision a pure Halo future that will prove how right you were all the time… please for the mother of god can we talk about something else for a change?

If you want us to talk about something else, the topic itself needs to be about something else!

> I’m even willing to exclude these heretic points from my initial post if it troubles you so much!

When did I give the impression I was angry? Just because I’m willing to debate the topic does not mean I am angry :confused:

15

> 2533274965837334;13:
> In addition, just because this statement annoys me, mechanics like sprint, ads, etc. are not across-the-board innovations in FPS gameplay. Calling FPS gameplay with sprint innovative and FPS gameplay without sprint unprogressive is like calling automatic shifting innovative and manual shifting unprogressive.
> You implement a mechanic like sprint in the context and concept of designing a certain kind of gameplay just like you implement an automatic gearbox to design a certain class of car (i.e. a model that focuses on city comfort and traffic).

It’s posts like this that keep me sane. It’s like coming across a giant oasis in the desert.

> If you want us to talk about something else, the topic itself needs to be about something else!

Yeah uh, what do you want me to say here?

I actually wasn’t even considering replying just because I’ve become jaded towards these kinds of topics.

I agree that these are some of the challenges facing Halo 5. Not much else to say about them, other than that I don’t put much stock into reviews.

> as essential, as a minimum requirement that every shooter has to meet.

The fact this is such a common train of thought pisses me off beyond belief, and I’m not just referring to sprint here.

No mechanic should ever be “required”, in fact I would not even say that about something as “standard” as simply Jumping. Because then you start limiting what a game can actually be, and start making everything with the same cookie-cutter formula instead of having the creative freedom to actually make new experiences.

Yet people tell me I’m the one that needs to open MY mind, when they themselves are too afraid to step outside their comfort zone of millitary shooters while I’ve played hundreds of different games from different genres.

Saying “Halo needs sprint because other shooters are doing it” is akin to saying “the Impossible Game needs the ability to move freely because Mario has it”. In a perfect world the only things these games would need are mechanics that complement their gameplay.