Halo 3: The Precursors' Gift to Gaming.

Note: I did pretty bad making the poll because I wouldn’t purchase/support Halo if it was either HYBRID or MODERN, so please choose your MOST disappointing option.
Note 2: If you choose the FIRST option, it means you won’t settle for neither a modern nor a hybrid approach. Again, please post if possible and elaborate on your choice.

Good evening, my friends. As you all well know, Halo is not doing so well right now. It is on life support.

Many of us who are against the current direction Halo is taking have voiced all of our concerns; in multiple formats, in different words, on multiple forums and social media. We all know the modernization – or more specifically the “CODification” – of Halo is not the way to go. The majority have spoken. Some have even become martyrs and have gotten banned on these forums just to get their point across. Hopefully, their motives won’t go in vain.

We want Halo to end on a high note, and the only way to do that is to emulate the core of the classic Halo experience. We cannot afford to implement modern features and mechanics of other popular, fast-paced shooters in Halo. It would be unthinkable HERESY, as the Covenant would say.

Some people have claimed that those who want Halo to go back to its roots, to put it simply, aren’t helping because Halo 5 “should be its own thing”. Okay, so can this be defined, and how? How can Halo 5 be its own thing? Many of us, more than likely the majority, who loved Halo pre-Reach (or at least pre-Halo 4 since Reach left mixed reviews) want Halo to stay true to its individuality and uniqueness. The gameplay wasn’t cheap or uninspired like COD is nowadays.

Additionally, I’m seeing that some possible detractors of the Campaign to Emulate the Core of the Classic Halo Games are claiming that Halo will become the very thing many of us in the Halo community have declared COD of being guilty of – which is simply being just a reskinned, money-milking shooter. No. That is just not true.

You see, what if COD decided to grab some inspiration from a game like Halo? What if it derailed from its normalcy of being a class-based, fast-paced shooter with perks and loadouts went on to be more simple, with an “easy to play, but hard to master” way of gameplay? Everyone starts out on an equal-footing, with no overabundance of medals and gimmicks? You get the point. Well it would be catching A LOT of flak from its player-base, and there’s no doubt in my mind that many of those who’d criticize that type of COD game would point out how COD would be nothing more but a COD shooter with a Halo skin on it.

What the developers need to realize is that what is WORSE than MORE of the same is LESS of the same. It’s completely OKAY for a Halo game to have more of the same, but unlike COD, you’ll need to innovate, improve and expand WITHOUT releasing a title yearly, WITHOUT deviating from the core of the classics, and without removing things that simply made Halo even better (e.g. Elites and armor customization, dual-wielding, MLG support, etc.).

Therefore, IN A WAY, those claiming the next Halo game “needs to be its own thing” are possibly incorrect. That would be taking a HUGE risk, one that 343 cannot afford whatsoever. They took way too many more risks than they could afford and completely blew it with Halo 4. This time, it’s time for Halo to recover by erring on the side of caution; to implement features/mechanics that had no reason to be removed, and to remove features/mechanics that just simply don’t work in Halo (but work in other popular, modern shooters).

Keep in mind that forums for gaming community are a minority. Many gamers do not utilize a game’s forums, but it is an ideal way of receiving feedback from the hardcore/competitive players – the ones who have the most experience with the game and knows its ins-and-outs. With them, a game can cater to both casual AND competitive players because a causal game is only good for casuals (only temporarily, in some cases, however), while a game with a focus on the hardcore/competitive community makes for a great experience for both of the playstyle’s communities.

Right now I do notice how some are saying that the next Halo game should be a hybrid of the classic Halo games while having some of its modern features/mechanics. Do I think that’s correct? Absolutely not. As I, and many others have said previously, Halo cannot afford anymore risks. It’s time to err on the side of caution and for it to go back to its roots.

That being said, will you AVOID purchasing the next Halo games if they decide to take a more modern approach (Halo 4), a more hybrid approach (Halo: Reach), or a more classic approach (Halo: CE, Halo 2, Halo 3)? Please elaborate after posting, especially if you choose the hybrid option.

Thank you.

No WOT can be provided for this thread!

I mostly agree with you. I do believe that Halo 5 should be very reminiscent of trilogy gameplay, but I do not wish to see Dual-Wielding make any return, nor do I want to see a lack of fall damage either.

If I see faithful trilogy core play at the heart of Halo 5’s gameplay teasers, I’ll be happy. If I see a more modern approach, I’ll likely buy it for the campaign, try out some things looking for pros and cons, then likely shelve it. I don’t think I could ever part with or sell a Halo game. I’m simply too attached to this franchise at this point. (10-year fan.)

I don’t like this poll because I wouldn’t buy it if it were either of the first 2 options, but I voted for the most-disappointing one.

> I don’t like this poll because I wouldn’t buy it if it were either of the first 2 options, but I voted for the most-disappointing one.

Yeah, I know. This poll is pretty bad. I think I’m going to remake it right now.

> I don’t like this poll because I wouldn’t buy it if it were either of the first 2 options, but I voted for the most-disappointing one.

Unfortunately I can’t edit it. :frowning:

I’ll probably buy it no matter what it is. Whether I’ll like it is another matter.

If we keep going in the direction that Reach started us off in, and that Halo 4 kept us in, then I personally won’t be very appreciative. The problems with Reach- and 4-specific game mechanics have been discussed to death on these forums, and I’ve yet to see successful comprehensive defenses of some of these mechanics (e.g. sprint).

If it’s a carbon copy of Halo 3, however, then it won’t hold my attention. I’ll enjoy it for a little while, but I’ll inevitably get pulled away. It doesn’t take much to evolve the franchise, but 343i has to add something. (To wit: the only significant new combat features I can remember going from Halo 1 to Halo 3 are boarding and equipment. There were tons of little things, like dual-wielding and detachable turrets, but really only two big things that I can recall, and that was enough.)

As it stands, while most of the “modern” game mechanics are flawed, I think two of them (Loadouts and Ordnance) can be turned into legitimate evolutions of the franchise if they are scaled back heavily. Doing that would be a good way to evolve the Halo 3 core without ending up with a carbon copy, and without the franchise appearing to have regressed.

> > I don’t like this poll because I wouldn’t buy it if it were either of the first 2 options, but I voted for the most-disappointing one.
>
> Unfortunately I can’t edit it. :frowning:

Did you try editing your OP, and then looking for an “Edit Poll” button while on the edit page?

If you don’t see it, consider PMing a mod. I can see that button, so chances are, the rest of the team can, too. I’m not 100% sure poll-editing is something we do on request, but we do at least have the ability.

^I put purchase/support so you can buy it but that doesn’t necessarily mean you’ll support it. Yeah, bad poll is bad. Sorry. xD

It only gives me an option to create another poll, which I don’t want. I want this poll to be deleted so I can recreate it, although for now I left a note at the top of the OP stating that choosing option one will mean being against both option 1 AND 2 (unless you can elaborate in a post).

Halo 4’s formula is like a like a bad foundation for a building. It doesn’t mater how good the walls are or how much you improve it, the foundation is still crooked and it will collapse. That is one road we need to avoid completely and utterly. I would be for Halo Reach formula as long as there were good maps. Halo 2 formula would be fine as well.

There’s so much I could say on this topic. So much. But -Yoink- it.

Classic
Would buy, would enjoy, would be disappointed in 343I.

Hybrid
Too vague of a term.
Dual Wielding and other mechanics belong here because they aren’t “oreginuhl haylo”.
Not inherently for or against. Depends on a case-by-case basis.

Infinity
Bland. Played it before elsewhere. Wouldn’t buy, wouldn’t enjoy.

Go Classic Halo.

I like to get a Hybrid of all 3, but the game will need to be an Arena Shooter, making it more like H2/H3 than the later.

Life cycle of a Halo game:

  1. Over-hyped

  2. Released

  3. Major let down (can’t live up to hype)

  4. Bashed for a few years

  5. New Halo Game released

  6. Old Halo game suddenly remembered fondly

  7. Old Halo game now best Halo game ever

Apparently no one remembers all the Halo 3 bashing. All the “gimmicks”, how it “ruined Halo”, messed up the core gaming mechanics of the first two, etc.
I got ridiculed by my hardcore Halo 2 friends who refused to play it.
I’m guessing in another year or so, Halo 4 will be the “best Halo ever” and I’ll be digging through forums finding threads about how horrible it was to remind everyone just how forgetful we are.
It’s already happening with Reach … slowly.

> Life cycle of a Halo game:
>
> 1. Over-hyped
>
> 2. Released
>
> 3. Major let down (can’t live up to hype)
>
> 4. Bashed for a few years
>
> 5. New Halo Game released
>
> 6. Old Halo game suddenly remembered fondly
>
> 7. Old Halo game now best Halo game ever
>
> Apparently no one remembers all the Halo 3 bashing. All the “gimmicks”, how it “ruined Halo”, messed up the core gaming mechanics of the first two, etc.
> I got ridiculed by my hardcore Halo 2 friends who refused to play it.
> I’m guessing in another year or so, Halo 4 will be the “best Halo ever” and I’ll be digging through forums finding threads about how horrible it was to remind everyone just how forgetful we are.
> It’s already happening with Reach … slowly.

That is simply nothing but misinformation. After Halo 3 everything got questionable with Reach. It’s just Reach isn’t AS stale as Halo 3 since Reach was the game that hasn’t been out as long. No one will come back or will be praising Halo 4 when the future Halo games are released, and if that happens it’ll be a minority. Look at the number of players on Halo 4.

Halo 3 was the pinnacle of the Halo franchise. Some say it was 2 but I’ve noticed within the community that Halo 2 and 3 are VERY close in polls in which was the best. Either way both are AWESOME Halo games and Bungie just set the bar higher with each classic Halo game. They gave the fans what they wanted and even more.

I really want to know what you’re smoking because what you’re saying is simply not true, but I can say that some hardcore Halo 2 fans did tire of Halo after that. However, those guys surely got toppled by the Halo 3 fan-base.

Watch my video link. It’s mainly satirical but it even shows some factual information (Halo 3 topping Halo 2 in sales).

None of the above. I’ll buy it for the champaign and co-op if nothing else. 343 seems to have quite the handle on storytelling, so I’m going to enjoy that.

MOST disappointing you say… Hmm. I’m not really sure. Not the hybrid option. Both full continuance of the trends Halo 4/Reach have set AND total reverse back to Halo 3 sound pretty sucky to me. I would still play matchmaking, but if the Destiny hypetrain turns out to be true I think I might find myself spending more time questing around the solar system slaying aliens than I would fighting Spartans in the arena.

> None of the above. I’ll buy it for the champaign and co-op if nothing else. 343 seems to have quite the handle on storytelling, so I’m going to enjoy that.
>
> <mark>MOST disappointing you say… Hmm. I’m not really sure. Not the hybrid option. Both full continuance of the trends Halo 4/Reach have set AND total reverse back to Halo 3 sound pretty sucky to me.</mark> I would still play matchmaking, but if the Destiny hypetrain turns out to be true I think I might find myself spending more time questing around the solar system slaying aliens than I would fighting Spartans in the arena.

Then where can Halo go? IMO no one has presented a better alternative than innovating, improving and expanding from the core of the classics.

> > None of the above. I’ll buy it for the champaign and co-op if nothing else. 343 seems to have quite the handle on storytelling, so I’m going to enjoy that.
> >
> > <mark>MOST disappointing you say… Hmm. I’m not really sure. Not the hybrid option. Both full continuance of the trends Halo 4/Reach have set AND total reverse back to Halo 3 sound pretty sucky to me.</mark> I would still play matchmaking, but if the Destiny hypetrain turns out to be true I think I might find myself spending more time questing around the solar system slaying aliens than I would fighting Spartans in the arena.
>
> Then where can Halo go? IMO no one has presented a better alternative than innovating, improving and expanding from the core of the classics.

What would you suggest as improving and expanding on the core of the classics though? That’s what I’m most curious about, since I don’t hear many ideas that aren’t either promptly shot down by people or are actual improvements on the classics beyond “Just make them with better graphics and new maps” - which is hardly an innovation or improvement in any way as far as I’m concerned.

Can’t really offer any of my own though, since I just play the game. I don’t understand the metagame involved or… Well, anything really. I play for the campaign, play MM with friends now and then… I’m just an average Halo fan. Nothing more nothing less. Any suggestions from me would be worthess.

I’m ineligible for voting though, since I’d buy it regardless of what it turned out like. As a few others have said: Buy it, yes. Enjoy it, we’ll see.

Ah, I screwed my vote. I neither accept Reach nor H4, but voted for Reach only. Whatever.
(-.-)

I actually enjoy H4 more than Reach… But that’s probably only because it has more reliable weapon mechanics, namely hitscan and no bloom right from the beginning. It’s also a tad faster, I prefer fast over overly slow. Though H4 is too fast. H2 had the right pace.

But I want classic Halo back, and the numbers speak for themselves. I think it’s more important to discuss what new features should stay.

Hitscan definitely, on every weapon. Projectiles don’t work over the net, have never, will never and surely dedicated servers won’t magically fix this. Even the short-range weapons should have it, just to make sure. The Needler and PP are exceptions, of course.
Sprint… For campaign only!
Armor abilities, loadouts and ordnance can go to where the pepper grows. They will never be balanced and people will find a way to abuse it. I cannot think of one armor ability that wouldn’t negatively effect combat. You?

> Ah, I screwed my vote. I neither accept Reach nor H4, but voted for Reach only. Whatever.
> (-.-)
>
> I actually enjoy H4 more than Reach… But that’s probably only because it has more reliable weapon mechanics, namely hitscan and no bloom right from the beginning. It’s also a tad faster, I prefer fast over overly slow. Though H4 is too fast. H2 had the right pace.
>
> But I want classic Halo back, and the numbers speak for themselves. I think it’s more important to discuss what new features should stay.
>
> Hitscan definitely, on every weapon. Projectiles don’t work over the net, have never, will never and surely dedicated servers won’t magically fix this. Even the short-range weapons should have it, just to make sure. The Needler and PP are exceptions, of course.
> Sprint… For campaign only!
> Armor abilities, loadouts and ordnance can go to where the pepper grows. They will never be balanced and people will find a way to abuse it. I cannot think of one armor ability that wouldn’t negatively effect combat. You?

Thruster pack.

> > Ah, I screwed my vote. I neither accept Reach nor H4, but voted for Reach only. Whatever.
> > (-.-)
> >
> > I actually enjoy H4 more than Reach… But that’s probably only because it has more reliable weapon mechanics, namely hitscan and no bloom right from the beginning. It’s also a tad faster, I prefer fast over overly slow. Though H4 is too fast. H2 had the right pace.
> >
> > But I want classic Halo back, and the numbers speak for themselves. I think it’s more important to discuss what new features should stay.
> >
> > Hitscan definitely, on every weapon. Projectiles don’t work over the net, have never, will never and surely dedicated servers won’t magically fix this. Even the short-range weapons should have it, just to make sure. The Needler and PP are exceptions, of course.
> > Sprint… For campaign only!
> > Armor abilities, loadouts and ordnance can go to where the pepper grows. They will never be balanced and people will find a way to abuse it. I cannot think of one armor ability that wouldn’t negatively effect combat. You?
>
> Thruster pack.

Instand survive button?

The thruster just looks good because the other armor abilities are ridicilous game breaking.

Maybe as a single use only equipment.

> snip

The TP takes skill at mid-cqc as long as it remains single use or maybe just limited use we are fine.

> > Life cycle of a Halo game:
> >
> > 1. Over-hyped
> >
> > 2. Released
> >
> > 3. Major let down (can’t live up to hype)
> >
> > 4. Bashed for a few years
> >
> > 5. New Halo Game released
> >
> > 6. Old Halo game suddenly remembered fondly
> >
> > 7. Old Halo game now best Halo game ever
> >
> > Apparently no one remembers all the Halo 3 bashing. All the “gimmicks”, how it “ruined Halo”, messed up the core gaming mechanics of the first two, etc.
> > I got ridiculed by my hardcore Halo 2 friends who refused to play it.
> > I’m guessing in another year or so, Halo 4 will be the “best Halo ever” and I’ll be digging through forums finding threads about how horrible it was to remind everyone just how forgetful we are.
> > It’s already happening with Reach … slowly.
>
> <mark>That is simply nothing but misinformation</mark>. After Halo 3 everything got questionable with Reach. It’s just Reach isn’t AS stale as Halo 3 since Reach was the game that hasn’t been out as long. No one will come back or will be praising Halo 4 when the future Halo games are released, and if that happens it’ll be a minority. Look at the number of players on Halo 4.
>
> Halo 3 was the pinnacle of the Halo franchise. Some say it was 2 but I’ve noticed within the community that Halo 2 and 3 are VERY close in polls in which was the best. Either way both are AWESOME Halo games and Bungie just set the bar higher with each classic Halo game. They gave the fans what they wanted and even more.
>
> I really want to know what you’re smoking because what you’re saying is simply not true, but I can say that some hardcore Halo 2 fans did tire of Halo after that. However, those guys surely got toppled by the Halo 3 fan-base.
>
> Watch my video link. It’s mainly satirical but it even shows some factual information (Halo 3 topping Halo 2 in sales).

How long have you been around? It is not misinformation, it is how it is.
I always see the same 7-step pattern around every Halo game except for HCE.

1: Complain about how current game is the worst entry in the series.

2: Demand new entry in series to be like a previous entry. After all, older was better.

3: Trailer/info released.

4: Hype game to levels that are objectively going to dissapoint from the start.

5: Game gets released

6: Day 1 critism turns into archetypical critisism for game until next entry.

7: Start at step 1 and repeat steps.

Halo 2 was hated by so many people. It was just ridiculous.
> After a few years it is considered by many to be the best in the series.

Halo 3 was hated on by so many people who adored H2. It was just ridiculous.
> Now it is somehow remembered as the ‘perfect’ Halo.

Reach…yes, even Reach, was hated by so many people.
> Even though it is still not a darling amongst the community people are far more nuanced and dare I say positive about it than they were back in the days.

As for H3 being the pinnacle of Halo…well, it was in terms of popularity. But keep in mind that in the pre-CoD era Halo was the thing mainstream gamers flocked to. During its reign is when CoD was slowly starting to become the next big thing for mainstream gamers.
While its gameplay is sure important in its popularity, its dwindling mainstream appeal is arguably its biggest problem that can be accounted for the lack of a long term huge community at the moment.

If you ask me, H3 was the ‘worst’ Halo in the series. The only game in the series to change very little compared to the predecessor, and those changes didn’t really made the gameplay more appealing than it was in H2. Maps ware really stale and bad compared to H2’s stellar roster. Campaign was a huge letdown. And I can go on.
Why? Because I got on the hype train and expected it to be a lot different than it turned out to be. It wasn’t classic Halo, nor was it a full step forward.

As for your poll: I will buy Halo 5 regardless of direction taken. Will I like it as much as I do H2? Suppose I won’t. Then again: I’m not a teenager anymore, my life’s priorities are different than back in the days. I can live with H5 not having me hooked for 3 years…
I would however be very dissapointed if they would go back to H3 gameplay. I’d rather see MM be split in ‘classic’ and ‘modern’ gameplay. Best of both worlds. No need to split the community any further.