Guys, you need to take a step back and look at what actually sells games, not game mechanics or anything else. For examlpe, listen to this review of halo reach. listen to this guys halo 3 one as well. Many gamers, (you know, the other 10 million people that bought halo 3 and didnt use the multiplayer) dont really care about “DMRs and BRs and bloom” they want something refreshing and new.
When you keep pushing the same stuff it gets old, many gamers have already done the “CTF and team slayer” and want something easy (COD) or some good storytelling (ME3/Skyrim/GTA5). If halo 2 was released with reach’s netcode today, it would have the same population as halo reach with reasonably similar sales figures, why you may ask, because the market has no demand for something as simple as the older halo games.
<mark>Kids today dont want to play CE, they dont want to learn how to shoot and strafe; they want COD osama -Yoink!- edition so they can feel like a hard -Yoink- for doing absolutely nothing.</mark>
By the way, this is for those of you who say halo reach failed.
Not to mention reach’s sales day one, 2 week, and 1 year sales topple halo 3’s.
maybe halo 4 will not be what youre looking for, in which case, feel free to voice your claim, it just seems silly to me that quite a few people on here say halo 4 will fail when it will probably be the most “successful” halo to date, at least in terms of sales figures.
I agree with you, i was a rage when the leak hit. Looked at it from a positive point of view, and think its going to be good. Maybe even great.
Though i think they need to plan now for a possible TU. Just in case there are some unforeseen problems.
You are going to get flamed but here is my take on this.
Halo CE - Reach (I’l get to the reach part about in a bit)
Are based on a 2001 game design. It’s 2012 now. the formula is tired and true. It works and most of us love it. It is what we are use to, But for the average gamer that played halo 2 or 3 back in the day do not play it anymore. Reach tried to modernize halo but with reach it sort of fell on its back. Reach tried to do this with AA’s and Bloom.
What Bungie got wrong was they try to add something new on the surface and not underneath. That’s why MLG reach plays like the older halos. Because all the new changes are on a surface level. 343 is doing the opposite and changing it from underneath but keeping the feel of halo intact… Which is a hard task. I’m keeping an open mind towards this.
The fact that it’s Halo means it will be a hit, it is a well-established franchise, it is also the start of a new trilogy with a new company, so that means that 343 also has a bit of a curiosity thing working a bit in their favor for sales at least, but they have to impress with Halo 4 if they want to sell more titles.
> You are going to get flamed but here is my take on this.
>
> Halo CE - Reach (I’l get to the reach part about in a bit)
>
> Are based on a 2001 game design. It’s 2012 now. the formula is tired and true. It works and most of us love it. It is what we are use to, But for the average gamer that played halo 2 or 3 back in the day do not play it anymore. Reach tried to modernize halo but with reach it sort of fell on its back. Reach tried to do this with AA’s and Bloom.
>
> What Bungie got wrong was they try to add something new on the surface and not underneath. That’s why MLG reach plays like the older halos. Because all the new changes are on a surface level. 343 is doing the opposite and changing it from underneath but keeping the feel of halo intact… Which is a hard task. I’m keeping an open mind towards this.
>
> inb4 I get called bad.
On the contrary, I think you might be right on the money.
You think Reach is going to average those numbers when Halo 4 is released? Halo 3 population per day was 850,000 to 1,000,000 until Reach’s launch. Then it went down to 150,000 a day and now it’s probably around 100,000. Reach will not average nummbers close to what it does now compared to Halo 3 and Halo 3 in comparison to its current time during life cycle was far more popular.
That being said, Halo 1 is better than both games and sold less than either title. Halo 3 was far more successful online though because Reach won’t hold those averages. Also, games are suppose to break records of previous games because the industry is growing. The fact Reach hasn’t proved it is a failure.
I’ve defended Reach in the past, but you’re an obvious troll.
77 months into its life cycle and Halo 3’s average is still almost as high as Halo Reach’s life cycle which is 15 months long and hasn’t even encountered a new halo game release.
There’s no doubt it will be a huge success. But depending on whether the new matchmaking features are going to be in most playlists or just some playlists, the new trilogy might be comprised of a completely new fanbase. Kinda like the two Star Wars trilogies, I guess.
> > You are going to get flamed but here is my take on this.
> >
> > Halo CE - Reach (I’l get to the reach part about in a bit)
> >
> > Are based on a 2001 game design. It’s 2012 now. the formula is tired and true. It works and most of us love it. It is what we are use to, But for the average gamer that played halo 2 or 3 back in the day do not play it anymore. Reach tried to modernize halo but with reach it sort of fell on its back. Reach tried to do this with AA’s and Bloom.
> >
> > What Bungie got wrong was they try to add something new on the surface and not underneath. That’s why MLG reach plays like the older halos. Because all the new changes are on a surface level. 343 is doing the opposite and changing it from underneath but keeping the feel of halo intact… Which is a hard task. I’m keeping an open mind towards this.
> >
> > inb4 I get called bad.
>
> On the contrary, I think you might be right on the money.
It took me time to notice and admit this. I mean Reach to me is still mediocre though. but they have been technically the same game 3 or 4 times counting ODST.
Zero puncuation hit it right on the money. I believe the average gamer thinks like him.
Halo has simply lost its steam to the average gamer. Everyone complained about reach ( my self included) Paid attention to the surface details. Underneath. Same game.
I don’t exactly agree with “kids not wanting to learn how to get better” being the reason as to why no one wants to keep halo the same. I think its because as a sequel change is necessary, otherwise the franchise becomes stagnant and no ones wants the same thing twice…unless you went to see Hangover 2 that is.
> > Umm… Have you played Halo: Reach? Because its not exactly a success.
>
> Apart from surface detail yeah it failed bad. But money wise… It made bank.
Yes, but it would only make sense that Halo: Reach would have made a lot of money considering it’s predecessors.
> > > Umm… Have you played Halo: Reach? Because its not exactly a success.
> >
> > Apart from surface detail yeah it failed bad. But money wise… It made bank.
>
> Yes, but it would only make sense that Halo: Reach would have made a lot of money considering it’s predecessors.
Exactly. Thats how Each halo was. Halo 2 Rode on CE, Halo 3 Rode on Halo 2 and Reach rode on Halo 3
Seeing Reach was a spin off, Some percent of people never considered buying it. So halo 4 might ride of both.
Who knows. When I look at articles In the comment section some people are either mad because of the changes or “finally halo is finally changing”
> > > Umm… Have you played Halo: Reach? Because its not exactly a success.
> >
> > Apart from surface detail yeah it failed bad. But money wise… It made bank.
>
> Yes, but it would only make sense that Halo: Reach would have made a lot of money considering it’s predecessors.
Actually for a while, the main thing that made Reach “not feel right” to me was because MC wasn’t in it. Weird I know, but did anyone else have this effect?
there is no doubt it is not going to sell good. The real question is, “how long are people going to actually play it?” There are so many hardcore fans out there (like me) who, no matter how much they hate what the game is going to be, they will buy it. Why? Because Master Chief’s story matters to them, not what happens in it, not how it plays, but just the fact of it continueing is all it takes to make the game sell good. But people are going to get bored of campaign eventually, and when they go to Matchmaking, from what has been revealed… Their Halo 4 game is going to get some dust. i really hope 343 makes those changes work somehow…
i lost faith, but i havnt lost hope.
> > > > Umm… Have you played Halo: Reach? Because its not exactly a success.
> > >
> > > Apart from surface detail yeah it failed bad. But money wise… It made bank.
> >
> > Yes, but it would only make sense that Halo: Reach would have made a lot of money considering it’s predecessors.
>
> Actually for a while, the main thing that made Reach “not feel right” to me was because MC wasn’t in it. Weird I know, but did anyone else have this effect?
Yeah it did in ways, and Reaches campaign wasn’t very enjoyable. SO I believe the campaign alone will bring people back to Halo. Idk though I love the Mark 5B helmet versus Master Chiefs M6, I hope they put in Halo 4 as a cosmetic helmet.
As for the multi-player, definitely no guarantees.
