sure with the information we have seen lately, it does look like halo 4 will resemble cod.
but lets get one thing straight. halo is halo, cod is cod. Frank O’Connor is not going to let halo 4 turn into a cod in space.
personally, it shows that the halo franchise is evolving. it may be something that we’re not used to or something we don’t want. it’s evolving because new ideas are being practiced. if it was cod, thy would have the same thing over and over again but different skins. (same map layouts)
So for the time being, we’ll just have to wait to see how i works out. just trust 343 to do the right thing
I’ve noticed some of the complaints people stated:
Sprint- it’s a battlefield, i don’t think soldiers are going to do a fast walk to get to places
Instant respawn- people complained that halo was tooo slow, this is one way 343 is trying to make it a little faster
Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
I think its much worse than you can imagine. They are trying to marry some of what COD does with some of what Halo does. This won’t work. You’ve got to go all in. You want Sprint and instant respawning then you have to have instant kill times. Halo won’t have instant kill times. So it won’t work. Halo needs to be Halo. Once Halo starts adopting other game traits it simply doesn’t work. We saw this with Reach and Sprint and long kill times.
Listen, anyone who thinks Halo will be CoD in space is wrong. Halo will NEVER be like CoD. For one, the sandbox is different, in Halo, you will not be able to spawn with a rocket launcher or shotgun (or any power weapon) and so on. There is no need to worry, Halo is one of the most unique F.P.S’s I’ve ever played! Games like CoD are just too repetetive for my taste. If you play CoD, play it, I’m not going to make fun of you. One thing which is sad is how many people troll Halo when they haven’t playded it! I have a friend, he used to play CoD lots know he plays Halo quite a bit.
Sorry I went a bit off-topic then, just raising a point…
GreenSkull said creativity comes from other ideas, borrowing them and manipulating them to the game, think about that…
> > so what do guys think?
>
> I think its much worse than you can imagine. They are trying to marry some of what COD does with some of what Halo does. This won’t work. You’ve got to go all in. You want Sprint and instant respawning then you have to have instant kill times. Halo won’t have instant kill times. So it won’t work. Halo needs to be Halo. Once Halo starts adopting other game traits it simply doesn’t work. We saw this with Reach and Sprint and long kill times.
it’s not going to turn into COD. Frank O’Connor is not going to let 343 ruin halo. if they were i doubt he would work there.
> Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
>
> Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
Halo 3 Survived through TWO Modern warfares… Reach did What again?
Halo 3: A game that was 100% Halo and Destoyed CoD
Halo Reach: Copied some of CoD Features and Failed.
Halo Fans: “Go back to being Halo”
343: Adds even more features that copy CoD and broke reach.
We don’t want Halo 3.5, but we cannot afford to just scrap the feature that Made Halo, Halo.
> > Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
> >
> > Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
>
> Halo 3 Survived through TWO Modern warfares… Reach did What again?
>
> Halo 3: A game that was 100% Halo and Destoyed CoD
> Halo Reach: Copied some of CoD Features and Failed.
> Halo Fans: “Go back to being Halo”
> 343: Adds even more features that copy CoD and broke reach.
>
> We don’t want Halo 3.5, but we cannot afford to just scrap the feature that Made Halo, Halo.
halo will still be halo. the core gameplay will be there, just trust 343.
Halo has different sandbox, weapons will be able to be used on the map, you won’t have to use the one’s you spawn with all the time, vehicles, better customization, no kill streaks
> > Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
> >
> > Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
>
> Halo 3 Survived through TWO Modern warfares… Reach did What again?
>
> Halo 3: A game that was 100% Halo and Destoyed CoD
> Halo Reach: Copied some of CoD Features and Failed.
> Halo Fans: “Go back to being Halo”
> 343: Adds even more features that copy CoD and broke reach.
>
> We don’t want Halo 3.5, but we cannot afford to just scrap the feature that Made Halo, Halo.
Halo 3 “survived” through the rising of Modern Warfare. Call of Duty after CoD4 became a snowball, ever increasing. It’ll only get bigger and bigger. It wouldn’t have mattered if Halo: Reach was just like Halo 3 or if it didn’t come out at all. CoD would have still gotten bigger and bigger. The Halo series’ fall from #1 didn’t suddenly come as soon as Halo: Reach hit.
Also, Halo: Reach adapted some concepts from CoD and still did better in day 1 sales than Halo 3 and is reaching Halo 3’s total sales in less time. Hardly a failure. Whether or not Halo: Reach was a success or a failure is subjective from the consumer’s point of view.
Also, the features that made Halo “Halo” still exist, and were borrowed and adapted from games such as Quake that came before it.
At this point, the only major thing differentiating Halo 4 from Call of Duty is a health system, but Instant Respawn pretty much takes care of that…
Also:
> 2) Instant respawn- people complained that halo was tooo slow, this is one way 343 is trying to make it a little faster
We complained it was too slow because Halo: Reach players moved half as fast as Master Chief. This ultimately led to the creation of sprint, because Halo: Reach’s maps are too big for a slow spartan to walk across. All 343 had to do was change the movement speed back. I have no problem with gameplay speed in Halo Anniversary, or Halo 3.
> > > Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
> > >
> > > Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
> >
> > Halo 3 Survived through TWO Modern warfares… Reach did What again?
> >
> > Halo 3: A game that was 100% Halo and Destoyed CoD
> > Halo Reach: Copied some of CoD Features and Failed.
> > Halo Fans: “Go back to being Halo”
> > 343: Adds even more features that copy CoD and broke reach.
> >
> > We don’t want Halo 3.5, but we cannot afford to just scrap the feature that Made Halo, Halo.
>
> Halo 3 “survived” through the rising of Modern Warfare. Call of Duty after CoD4 became a snowball, ever increasing. It’ll only get bigger and bigger. It wouldn’t have mattered if Halo: Reach was just like Halo 3 or if it didn’t come out at all. CoD would have still gotten bigger and bigger. The Halo series’ fall from #1 didn’t suddenly come as soon as Halo: Reach hit.
>
> Also, Halo: Reach adapted some concepts from CoD and still did better in day 1 sales than Halo 3 and is reaching Halo 3’s total sales in less time. Hardly a failure. Whether or not Halo: Reach was a success or a failure is subjective from the consumer’s point of view.
>
> Also, the features that made Halo “Halo” still exist, and were borrowed and adapted from games such as Quake that came before it.
don’t forget that while cod fans were storming the beaches of Normandy for the third time, we were exploring delta halo.
halo was a bigger success before the MW trilogy. And it will be back on top soon
> At this point, the only major thing differentiating Halo 4 from Call of Duty is a health system, but Instant Respawn pretty much takes care of that…
>
> Also:
>
>
> > 2) Instant respawn- people complained that halo was tooo slow, this is one way 343 is trying to make it a little faster
>
> We complained it was too slow because Halo: Reach players moved half as fast as Master Chief. This ultimately led to the creation of sprint, because Halo: Reach’s maps are too big for a slow spartan to walk across. All 343 had to do was change the movement speed back. I have no problem with gameplay speed in Halo Anniversary, or Halo 3.
i noticed that too, but i also heard that respawning takes too long as well
> > Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
> >
> > Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
>
> Halo 3 Survived through TWO Modern warfares… Reach did What again?
>
> Halo 3: A game that was 100% Halo and Destoyed CoD
> Halo Reach: Copied some of CoD Features and Failed.
> Halo Fans: “Go back to being Halo”
> 343: Adds even more features that copy CoD and broke reach.
>
> We don’t want Halo 3.5, but we cannot afford to just scrap the feature that Made Halo, Halo.
> > > Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
> > >
> > > Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
> >
> > Halo 3 Survived through TWO Modern warfares… Reach did What again?
> >
> > Halo 3: A game that was 100% Halo and Destoyed CoD
> > Halo Reach: Copied some of CoD Features and Failed.
> > Halo Fans: “Go back to being Halo”
> > 343: Adds even more features that copy CoD and broke reach.
> >
> > We don’t want Halo 3.5, but we cannot afford to just scrap the feature that Made Halo, Halo.
>
> Halo 3 “survived” through the rising of Modern Warfare. Call of Duty after CoD4 became a snowball, ever increasing. It’ll only get bigger and bigger. It wouldn’t have mattered if Halo: Reach was just like Halo 3 or if it didn’t come out at all. CoD would have still gotten bigger and bigger. The Halo series’ fall from #1 didn’t suddenly come as soon as Halo: Reach hit.
>
> Also, Halo: Reach adapted some concepts from CoD and still did better in day 1 sales than Halo 3 and is reaching Halo 3’s total sales in less time. Hardly a failure. Whether or not Halo: Reach was a success or a failure is subjective from the consumer’s point of view.
>
> Also, the features that made Halo “Halo” still exist, and were borrowed and adapted from games such as Quake that came before it.
Yeah, Halo took things from Quake, but that was QUAKE, you know? that game with no gimmicks and no custom classes and no armor abilities or perks?
> > At this point, the only major thing differentiating Halo 4 from Call of Duty is a health system, but Instant Respawn pretty much takes care of that…
> >
> > Also:
> >
> >
> > > 2) Instant respawn- people complained that halo was tooo slow, this is one way 343 is trying to make it a little faster
> >
> > We complained it was too slow because Halo: Reach players moved half as fast as Master Chief. This ultimately led to the creation of sprint, because Halo: Reach’s maps are too big for a slow spartan to walk across. All 343 had to do was change the movement speed back. I have no problem with gameplay speed in Halo Anniversary, or Halo 3.
>
> i noticed that too, but i also heard that respawning takes too long as well
The only time I’ve ever heard that respawning takes too long is in MLG Objective gametypes, where it can be as high as 10 seconds. Instant Respawn will ultimately ruin these games because of the health system. It only works in COD because there isn’t a health system, so you either die or don’t die. In Halo, you can get in a heated battle with someone and both be one-shot, win the battle, but then get shot a second later by the same dude, who now has full shields.
> > > > Halo isn’t turning into CoD. Sure, it’s borrowing and adapting a couple concepts from CoD, but that doesn’t mean it’s turning into it.
> > > >
> > > > Halo was born from this exact method. Bungie borrowed and adapted many concepts from other pieces of science fiction and from games that came before it. Halo isn’t the unique snowflake people want themselves to believe it is.
> > >
> > > Halo 3 Survived through TWO Modern warfares… Reach did What again?
> > >
> > > Halo 3: A game that was 100% Halo and Destoyed CoD
> > > Halo Reach: Copied some of CoD Features and Failed.
> > > Halo Fans: “Go back to being Halo”
> > > 343: Adds even more features that copy CoD and broke reach.
> > >
> > > We don’t want Halo 3.5, but we cannot afford to just scrap the feature that Made Halo, Halo.
> >
> > Halo 3 “survived” through the rising of Modern Warfare. Call of Duty after CoD4 became a snowball, ever increasing. It’ll only get bigger and bigger. It wouldn’t have mattered if Halo: Reach was just like Halo 3 or if it didn’t come out at all. CoD would have still gotten bigger and bigger. The Halo series’ fall from #1 didn’t suddenly come as soon as Halo: Reach hit.
> >
> > Also, Halo: Reach adapted some concepts from CoD and still did better in day 1 sales than Halo 3 and is reaching Halo 3’s total sales in less time. Hardly a failure. Whether or not Halo: Reach was a success or a failure is subjective from the consumer’s point of view.
> >
> > Also, the features that made Halo “Halo” still exist, and were borrowed and adapted from games such as Quake that came before it.
>
> don’t forget that while cod fans were storming the beaches of Normandy for the third time, we were exploring delta halo.
>
> halo was a bigger success before the MW trilogy. And it will be back on top soon
no halo was a success until Reach was released. H3 beat MW1 and was number 2 to MW2. Reach is what #6?
they have to go back to the hlo CE-3 formula as a foundation and add to that, not do what reach and seemingly h4 is doing by removing core aspects of the halo formula