H4 will not be the Halo you know and love...

To understand why H4 will not resonate with the core Halo fan we have to look at the past…

Basically, we have one group of players that have a deep appreciation and understanding of what they liked about Halo. Halo CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3 were three games in the series that were well received by players of Halo as a whole. Halo 2 became the benchmark for online Halo play, in general, and the competitive designs in it’s map, movement, weaponry and ranking system became the key stone of this franchises online play. It was the first. It was what we feel in love with. Halo 3 showed a direct lineage to Halo 2 and also some refinements in graphics and sounds, some improvements in ranking and other various changes that improved and advanced game play and reduced glitches and other issues found in Halo 2. There was still no doubt it was a sequel to Halo2. The game still played very much the same. We now had a consistent style of game play even as the game progressed from the original game. When Reach hit, all of that changed. That is a fact, like it or not.

Reach brought a completely new set of wholesale changes to the Halo franchise. The graphics were improved over the prior game, you were still a Spartan, be it an earlier version, and the maps still were similar, but little else seemed to remain. The movement was slower and the game now incorporated “abilities” that significantly altered the way the game was played. These “abilities” changed the core play of the game. There was already a continuous thread that bound the previous titles together and now that thread was not there. These “abilities” altered game play so much that to those of us who played the original games at the times of their release and throughout Halo’s history now saw what can best be described as a whole new game. Some of us referred to it as a “stand alone” game. To us it was not Halo, period. Regardless of how someone describes the changes, their feelings or expresses their opinions it was a complete departure from the three games in the series we had played from the beginning. It has nothing to do with “adapting”, “being stuck in the past” or about “not being able to deal with change”.

There is no doubt Halo is changing DRASTICALLY, far more than it ever has before. With change will come wide exodus of old fans and what 343 hopes is a new influx of “Halo noobs”. We saw it with Reach most notably, the fans of the original Trilogy and Sandbox elements did not take kindly to the changing of the core gameplay, there was wide-spread complaints on the forums of Reach “lacking the Halo feel” and mass population exodus of the veteran fanbase.

Not only is 343 changing the core gameplay once again, they are changing the entire basis of the game from Sandbox Arena shooter to Class-based progression shooter ala CoD and BF. This will undoubtedly wipe out the majority of the trilogy-style of play fans still remaining, and make way for a an entirely different Halo experience for years to come. 343 is not looking back, they are not looking at preserving the Halo name they are looking to re-create it.

The core fans of the trilogy style of play will most likely not like H4, because their perfect vision of Halo is dead. Its gone, never to return. 343 has made it clear that they will not be catering to the veteran core fans of Halo, it was clear to me ever since I saw the bolded title “How 343 is re-creating Halo multiplayer” in the H4 GI issue. H4 is re-introducing Reach elements like “abilities” and turning the game into a completely different game whether you like it or not.

So please, be prepared for wide controversy when H4 comes out and the forums are repeating like they did with Reach “This is not Halo” because they will be right. This will not be the Halo they grew up with and love catered to them, this will be the new Halo meant to expand the Halo audience, not to cater to nostalgic fans. Whether you take the leap to H4 will be you’re choice, but be prepared for an entirely different Halo experience because the trilogy-style of Halo will not be returning.

Old games need love too.

You make some good points. I like the way Halo 4 is going, but people should take a look at this.

Also, we were not “earlier” Spartans in Reach. Spartan IIIs came after Spartan IIs…

> To understand why H4 will not resonate with the core Halo fan we have to look at the past…
>
> Basically, we have one group of players that have a deep appreciation and understanding of what they liked about Halo. Halo CE, Halo 2 and Halo 3 were three games in the series that were well received by players of Halo as a whole. Halo 2 became the benchmark for online Halo play, in general, and the competitive designs in it’s map, movement, weaponry and ranking system became the key stone of this franchises online play. It was the first. It was what we feel in love with. Halo 3 showed a direct lineage to Halo 2 and also some refinements in graphics and sounds, some improvements in ranking and other various changes that improved and advanced game play and reduced glitches and other issues found in Halo 2. There was still no doubt it was a sequel to Halo2. The game still played very much the same. We now had a consistent style of game play even as the game progressed from the original game. When Reach hit, all of that changed. That is a fact, like it or not.
>
> Reach brought a completely new set of wholesale changes to the Halo franchise. The graphics were improved over the prior game, you were still a Spartan, be it an earlier version, and the maps still were similar, but little else seemed to remain. The movement was slower and the game now incorporated “abilities” that significantly altered the way the game was played. These “abilities” changed the core play of the game. There was already a continuous thread that bound the previous titles together and now that thread was not there. These “abilities” altered game play so much that to those of us who played the original games at the times of their release and throughout Halo’s history now saw what can best be described as a whole new game. Some of us referred to it as a “stand alone” game. To us it was not Halo, period. Regardless of how someone describes the changes, their feelings or expresses their opinions it was a complete departure from the three games in the series we had played from the beginning. It has nothing to do with “adapting”, “being stuck in the past” or about “not being able to deal with change”.
>
> There is no doubt Halo is changing DRASTICALLY, far more than it ever has before. With change will come wide exodus of old fans and what 343 hopes is a new influx of “Halo noobs”. We saw it with Reach most notably, the fans of the original Trilogy and Sandbox elements did not take kindly to the changing of the core gameplay, there was wide-spread complaints on the forums of Reach “lacking the Halo feel” and mass population exodus of the veteran fanbase.
>
> Not only is 343 changing the core gameplay once again, they are changing the entire basis of the game from Sandbox Arena shooter to Class-based progression shooter ala CoD and BF. This will undoubtedly wipe out the majority of the trilogy-style of play fans still remaining, and make way for a an entirely different Halo experience for years to come. 343 is not looking back, they are not looking at preserving the Halo name they are looking to re-create it.
>
> The core fans of the trilogy style of play will most likely not like H4, because their perfect vision of Halo is dead. Its gone, never to return. 343 has made it clear that they will not be catering to the veteran core fans of Halo, it was clear to me ever since I saw the bolded title “How 343 is re-creating Halo multiplayer” in the H4 GI issue. H4 is re-introducing Reach elements like “abilities” and turning the game into a completely different game whether you like it or not.
>
> So please, be prepared for wide controversy when H4 comes out and the forums are repeating like they did with Reach “This is not Halo” because they will be right. This will not be the Halo they grew up with and love catered to them, this will be the new Halo meant to expand the Halo audience, not to cater to nostalgic fans. Whether you take the leap to H4 will be you’re choice, but be prepared for an entirely different Halo experience because the trilogy-style of Halo will not be returning.

I admire the thought and time that has gone into this ,but chances are this isn’t going to be read by alot of people here,seeing as how this is like the 3rd or 4th thread with the same purpose…
Anyhow,likeRanger Onyx stated,you make some pretty good points,and I just wish that other people could understand that every Halo game doesn’t have to mimc the old Halo2 formula like Halo3 did.

You make some valid points OP…

Halo isn’t changing, FPS is and Halo is trying to keep up with it. Halo was once the pinnacle of Arena shooters b/c every great FPS at that time was that style. Since then the FPS genre has changed dramatically (mostly due to the success of CoD) and all other FPS franchises have had to either adapt or die out. Games like Quake and Unreal decided not to adapt and have not had a sequel since. Halo could’ve as well, but it’s too important of a franchise to both Microsoft and the Xbox brand so they wouldn’t have allowed it.

When Reach and all it’s gimmicks were announced I began playing Halo 3 as if it would be the last pure Halo mp experience. Because of this, playing mp in Reach (and I’m sure this will be true for H4), while nowhere near as fun, wasn’t as sad because I had already made peace with Halo’s mp death.

I still had fun playing Reach and I’m sure I’ll have fun playing H4. I’ll just know it’s not as fun as it could be.

Contrary to popular belief, the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s. In addition, Halo Reach kept a lot of what was familiar to Halo and added a few extras, as has been the case with each new Halo game.

To say that Halo 2 and 3 were entirely well received is either a lie or a statement out of ignorance. Halo 2 was possibly the most controversial Halo game with the plethora of core gameplay changes that spawned an entire website dedicated to the hate of Halo 2. Halo 3 was also very controversial with large portions of the community hating the changes. The hate and controversy seen with Halo Reach is nothing new.

Now, to address the main topic of this thread: do not presume to talk for the whole of the community. I think of myself as Halo vet, having played since early 2005, after the release of Halo 2, and as both a veteran and a competitive player, I look forward to Halo 4. Do not presume to call me a COD fan, because I have not been a fan of COD’s multiplayer since COD 4.

I think that the trend of some people hating, some accepting, and some loving the change will continue. This is the trend we’ve seen since Halo 2, and it will only continue.

Halo 4 will be a Halo we don’t know yet, but love.

> The core fans of the trilogy style of play will most likely not like H4, because their perfect vision of Halo is dead.

Excuse me, sir. You can’t just speak your mind in hopes of representing a community. I’m a core fan of the trilogy, I have been with this game since Combat Evolved and I like Reach and will like Halo 4. What you have written down is all “your” opinion. Next time, don’t try to represent and don’t put words in other people’s mouth.

Aside from that, yes, this Halo is a reimagining. It is meant to bring new players in. The thing about Halo is it’s always the fans who buy the games. It’s always the one’s who bought the old Halo’s who buy the game. There are no more first time Halo fans. Halo is not suppose to cater to the nostalgic feeling of old players. Halo should be a game that always has something new and exciting, which only the first Halo had.

The classic playlists in Halo 4 say otherwise.

> Halo isn’t changing, FPS is and Halo is trying to keep up with it. <mark>Halo was once the pinnacle of Arena shooters</mark> b/c every great FPS at that time was that style. Since then the FPS genre has changed dramatically (mostly due to the success of CoD) and all other FPS franchises have had to either adapt or die out. Games like Quake and Unreal decided not to adapt and have not had a sequel since. Halo could’ve as well, but it’s too important of a franchise to both Microsoft and the Xbox brand so they wouldn’t have allowed it.

I would hardly say the Halo was a pinnacle of Arena shooters. Maybe on the console, but not over all. In fact, Halo started to shift away from being an arena shooter since Halo 3.

> Contrary to popular belief, the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s. In addition, Halo Reach kept a lot of what was familiar to Halo and added a few extras, as has been the case with each new Halo game.
>
> To say that Halo 2 and 3 were entirely well received is either a lie or a statement out of ignorance. Halo 2 was possibly the most controversial Halo game with the plethora of core gameplay changes that spawned an entire website dedicated to the hate of Halo 2. Halo 3 was also very controversial with large portions of the community hating the changes. The hate and controversy seen with Halo Reach is nothing new.
>
> Now, to address the main topic of this thread: do not presume to talk for the whole of the community. I think of myself as Halo vet, having played since early 2005, after the release of Halo 2, and as both a veteran and a competitive player, I look forward to Halo 4. Do not presume to call me a COD fan, because I have not been a fan of COD’s multiplayer since COD 4.
>
> I think that the trend of some people hating, some accepting, and some loving the change will continue. This is the trend we’ve seen since Halo 2, and it will only continue.

Sure, but the changes from between CE, 2, and 3 weren’t as major as the changes from H3 to Reach.
The changes between the first three didn’t bother me in the least. I’m not speaking for anyone other than myself.

> Contrary to popular belief, <mark>the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s.</mark> In addition, Halo Reach kept a lot of what was familiar to Halo and added a few extras, as has been the case with each new Halo game.

This couldn’t be further from the truth. May I ask where you got this info?

Here is the actual running speed comparison (side-by-side) and clearly shows Halo 1 and 2 having the same speed, followed by Halo 3’s shortly after, and Halo Reach’s a few seconds later. They are in fact much closer to each other than many believed, but aren’t the same in any sense of the word.

Also, the jump height equals that of Halo 1 (100%), but not Halo 2 or 3’s (125%).

> Contrary to popular belief, the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s. In addition, Halo Reach kept a lot of what was familiar to Halo and added a few extras, as has been the case with each new Halo game.
>
> To say that Halo 2 and 3 were entirely well received is either a lie or a statement out of ignorance. Halo 2 was possibly the most controversial Halo game with the plethora of core gameplay changes that spawned an entire website dedicated to the hate of Halo 2. Halo 3 was also very controversial with large portions of the community hating the changes. The hate and controversy seen with Halo Reach is nothing new.
>
> Now, to address the main topic of this thread: do not presume to talk for the whole of the community. I think of myself as Halo vet, having played since early 2005, after the release of Halo 2, and as both a veteran and a competitive player, I look forward to Halo 4. Do not presume to call me a COD fan, because I have not been a fan of COD’s multiplayer since COD 4.
>
> I think that the trend of some people hating, some accepting, and some loving the change will continue. This is the trend we’ve seen since Halo 2, and it will only continue.

We can argue all we want about which Halo game “changed” the game the most, but the core of Halo has never been changed until Halo Reach whether you like it or not.

Halo trilogy formula: -Guns,grenade,melee aka the Golden triangle

  • Weapons(including power-ups,equipment,dual-wielding) and vehicles on the map

Halo Reach formula: -Guns, grenade,melee,AA’s as a single loadout

  • Weapons(No power-ups) and vehicles on the map

Halo 4 formula: Guns, grenade,melee, AA’s,modifications as loadouts

  • No weapons(besides maybe grenades) or power-ups on the map
  • Vehicles still on the map

With wide-spread change, will come wide divisions within the community this was the case with Reach and countless other games that have had drastic formula changes like the Rainbow Six series, Battlefield, Ninja Gaiden, ect…(IF you can think of better ones fill in the blanks). That divide will only increase with H4, and the core fans of the trilogy will most likely fall off while new Halo “noobs” will hopefully take their place if it goes according to plan.

I’m getting Halo 4 for the campaign. I don’t know what to think about the multiplayer, but when I play it I’ll share my feelings.

> > Contrary to popular belief, <mark>the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s.</mark> In addition, Halo Reach kept a lot of what was familiar to Halo and added a few extras, as has been the case with each new Halo game.
>
> This couldn’t be further from the truth. May I ask where you got this info?
>
> Here is the actual running speed comparison (side-by-side) and clearly shows Halo 1 and 2 having the same speed, followed by Halo 3’s shortly after, and Halo Reach’s a few seconds later.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFPg8jC3eEQ&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PL0239E142202E0F97

I got the info by doing tests using the radar from Halo 1, 2, and Reach, and the various incarnations of Battle Creek from each of these games. In Halo 1, the bases are 15 meters apart, and it takes 7 second to get from one base to the other (I repeated this and the following test several times to be sure of the speed).

In Halo 2, the bases are 25 meters apart, and it takes 7 seconds to get from one base to the other. This is also true for Halo Reach. Thus the movement speed in Halo 2 and Reach are the same.

I have to say the video you linked is flawed as is bases it’s world units off the size of the warthog, making guess as to the exact size of the vehicle in each game. In addition, Bungie has stated that the default movement in Halo Reach was faster than in Halo CE, and the jump height was higher. They talked about this in one of the podcasts after the Reach beta.

> Contrary to popular belief, the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s.

Proof please. I played Halo 2 alot, and I’ve played Reach alot. There is a difference.

> > Contrary to popular belief, the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s. In addition, Halo Reach kept a lot of what was familiar to Halo and added a few extras, as has been the case with each new Halo game.
> >
> > To say that Halo 2 and 3 were entirely well received is either a lie or a statement out of ignorance. Halo 2 was possibly the most controversial Halo game with the plethora of core gameplay changes that spawned an entire website dedicated to the hate of Halo 2. Halo 3 was also very controversial with large portions of the community hating the changes. The hate and controversy seen with Halo Reach is nothing new.
> >
> > Now, to address the main topic of this thread: do not presume to talk for the whole of the community. I think of myself as Halo vet, having played since early 2005, after the release of Halo 2, and as both a veteran and a competitive player, I look forward to Halo 4. Do not presume to call me a COD fan, because I have not been a fan of COD’s multiplayer since COD 4.
> >
> > I think that the trend of some people hating, some accepting, and some loving the change will continue. This is the trend we’ve seen since Halo 2, and it will only continue.
>
> We can argue all we want about which Halo game “changed” the game the most, but the core of Halo has never been changed until Halo Reach whether you like it or not.
>
> Halo trilogy formula: -Guns,grenade,melee aka the Golden triangle
> - Weapons(including power-ups,equipment,dual-wielding) and vehicles on the map
>
> Halo Reach formula: -Guns, grenade,melee,AA’s as a single loadout
> - Weapons(No power-ups) and vehicles on the map
>
> Halo 4 formula: Guns, grenade,melee, AA’s,modifications as loadouts
> - No weapons(besides maybe grenades) or power-ups on the map
> - Vehicles still on the map
>
> With wide-spread change, will come wide divisions within the community this was the case with Reach and countless other games that have had drastic formula changes like the Rainbow Six series, Battlefield, Ninja Gaiden, ect…(IF you can think of better ones fill in the blanks). That divide will only increase with H4, and the core fans of the trilogy will most likely fall off while new Halo “noobs” will hopefully take their place if it goes according to plan.

There are weapon on the maps in Halo 4, the difference is how they spawn in.

Now, let’s talk formula: The Halo formula was pretty similar between 1 and 2, the major differences coming from altered or new game mechanics (dual-wielding, vehicle jacking, lock-on rockets, etc). Halo 3 was the first to make that Triangle into a square with deployable Equipment. Reach’s AAs were an evolution of this.

Again, I can tell you with confidence that the apparent divide among the community is nothing new. Halo has been “dying”, according to various haters and hate groups, since Halo 2. This is nothing new. Some fans will leave, and new fans will come. If this were not the case, Halo would not be as big as it is now.

And let me end with a hypothetical: Do you think a game like Halo 1, 2, or 3 would do as well on today’s market as each did during release?

> > Contrary to popular belief, the movement speed in Halo Reach is equal to that of Halo 2’s, and the jump height between Halo 1 and Halo 2’s.
>
> Proof please. I played Halo 2 alot, and I’ve played Reach alot. There is a difference.

I just posted how I got to my conclusion, but I’ll address why there seems to be a differene: it’s all in the animations and the field of view. Look at Halo 1, it feels very smooth, and the chief seems to glide across the battlefield. This is due to both the way the character was animated and the elongated field of view. Now, in Halo 2, the field of view was “pulled back”, if that makes sense, the animations were slightly different, and of course, the movement speed with kicked up. In Halo Reach, the animations come from motion capture and hand-editing, and there is a slight difference in the field of view.