Halo 5 should just be simple

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

One of the best things about Halos 1-3 was the fact that it was simple. No sprint, no loadouts, etc. Just enter an arena map, pick up a gun, and go crazy. The core mechanics found in Halos 1-3 should remain the same for Halo 5. A lot of other games out there have all this common theme of sprinting, aiming down sights, etc, but Halo 5 should just be…Halo.

Obviously the addition of new vehicles, weapons, and even powerups of some short should be featured, as well as upgrades to things we love with Custom games and Forge, but nothing that the fans loved should be removed.

The problem with Halo 4 was that it removed too much and it didn’t feel too much like Halo. 343i, please just keep it simple: make the game feel like Halo, and just add new stuff (along with the old that we loved) the way that will make the game more fun.

2

Simplicity is a good place to start. If you HAD to add one thing to Halo, a weapon, a vehicle, a power up, a piece of equipment, a base player ability, what would it be?

3

> One of the best things about Halos 1-3 was the fact that it was simple. No sprint, no loadouts, etc. Just enter an arena map, pick up a gun, and go crazy. The core mechanics found in Halos 1-3 should remain the same for Halo 5. A lot of other games out there have all this common theme of sprinting, aiming down sights, etc, but Halo 5 should just be…Halo.
>
> Obviously the addition of new vehicles, weapons, and even powerups of some short should be featured, as well as upgrades to things we love with Custom games and Forge, but nothing that the fans loved should be removed.
>
> The problem with Halo 4 was that it <mark>removed too much</mark> and it didn’t feel too much like Halo. 343i, please just keep it simple: make the game feel like Halo, and just add new stuff (along with the old that we loved) the way that will make the game more fun.

I think they added too much instead of removing.

I agree, Halo should be simple. Grenade, strafe, shoot, melee… This is Halo. And for peole who love sprint and all that things let me remind you again: this is Halo. If you never liked rushing for the weapons without sprint, you never liked Halo.

4

> I think they added too much instead of removing.
>
> I agree, Halo should be simple. Grenade, strafe, shoot, melee… This is Halo. And for peole who love sprint and all that things let me remind you again: this is Halo. If you never liked rushing for the weapons without sprint, you never liked Halo.

I agree that they added too much, but remember they removed a lot of playlists and features from custom games/forge (like getting rid of actual Infection, wtf?).

I like your second point though; if you think sprint is necessary for Halo to be good, then you never really liked Halo.

5

> > One of the best things about Halos 1-3 was the fact that it was simple. No sprint, no loadouts, etc. Just enter an arena map, pick up a gun, and go crazy. The core mechanics found in Halos 1-3 should remain the same for Halo 5. A lot of other games out there have all this common theme of sprinting, aiming down sights, etc, but Halo 5 should just be…Halo.
> >
> > Obviously the addition of new vehicles, weapons, and even powerups of some short should be featured, as well as upgrades to things we love with Custom games and Forge, but nothing that the fans loved should be removed.
> >
> > The problem with Halo 4 was that it <mark>removed too much</mark> and it didn’t feel too much like Halo. 343i, please just keep it simple: make the game feel like Halo, and just add new stuff (along with the old that we loved) the way that will make the game more fun.
>
> I think they added too much instead of removing.
>
> I agree, Halo should be simple. Grenade, strafe, shoot, melee… This is Halo. And for peole who love sprint and all that things let me remind you again: this is Halo. <mark>If you never liked rushing for the weapons without sprint, you never liked Halo</mark>.

Cough

Yea i have only bought every piece of Halo-media available on the market because i hate having money in my wallet.

Jokes aside…

Wether as to one likes sprint or not, is not the foundation of ones opinion on the Halo franchise.

OT:
I like sprint being around, not for the rush for weapons but just so i can literally run straight into the fight and get cracking.

If it could please the crowd, they could make sprint a ‘‘Spartan Ability’’ which i assume is a special trait you pick for your spartan, during multiplayer.

Armor abilities? I’m just neutral here, i never use them seeing as i never find them useful. Won’t matter to me if they would’ve stayed anyways but they’ll probaly not return this time.

Loadouts? If they intend on keeping Infinity Slayer around for the fans of that particular Slayer Variant, then i say let the loadouts stay atleast for that.

6

you’re asking them to re-release Halo 1 and call it Halo 5. They’re re-releasing Halo 1 and calling it Halo: The Master Chief Collection. Don’t buy a sequel if you want the original, buy the freaking original.

7

The other good thing about older Halo games was that when you had DLC…you got to PLAY it.

8

> The other good thing about older Halo games was that when you had DLC…you got to PLAY it.

I bought it, I got to play it when they were brand new and I still get to play it.

9

As much as Halo needs to be simple, we cannot keep on promoting the notion that we only want all the old stuff in the game. There has to be something new or else the combat will never evolve (c wut i did thur?) I hate to use Battlefield as an example, yes it is a drastically different game, however in excels at how deep the gameplay is in multiplayer. It gives players many ways to approach a situation, which Halo already has and has to push for more. Right now we’re seeing the return of interactive maps, which is good because it provides more options. So we need more along those lines. Deeper gameplay mechanics should the priority over more equipment and guns.

10

Halo should be complex…

11

> One of the best things about Halos 1-3 was the fact that it was simple. No sprint, no loadouts, etc.

> Halo should be complex…

Relevant.

Halo should not be more complex than it is deep. If a game is too complex, than it begins to lose depth. If it is too simple, then it also loses depth. Halo needs some complexity, but not so much that it begins to lose depth, which is what happened with Halo 4.

12

> Cough
>
> Yea i have only bought every piece of Halo-media available on the market because i hate having money in my wallet.
>
> Jokes aside…
>
>
> Wether as to one likes sprint or not, is not the foundation of ones opinion on the Halo franchise.
>
> OT:
> I like sprint being around, not for the rush for weapons but just so i can literally run straight into the fight and get cracking.
>
> If it could please the crowd, they could make sprint a ‘‘Spartan Ability’’ which i assume is a special trait you pick for your spartan, during multiplayer.
>
> Armor abilities? I’m just neutral here, i never use them seeing as i never find them useful. Won’t matter to me if they would’ve stayed anyways but they’ll probaly not return this time.
>
> Loadouts? If they intend on keeping Infinity Slayer around for the fans of that particular Slayer Variant, then i say let the loadouts stay atleast for that.

Having sprint forces the devs to create larger maps to accommodate. Also, if you want sprint to actually feel like sprinting, you have to put the base movement speed at basically a snails pace. On the reverse side, H3 had smaller 4v4 maps, and a higher movement speed. Pointing these things out so I can make this point: You think Halo needs sprint, because Halo 4, needs sprint. There is a dichotomy there and it needs to be recognized. The amount of time you spend out of combat in H3 and H4 are virtually the same. The only real difference is that in H4 there is a sensation of getting back more quickly. That sensation may be gratifying, but it’s in your head.

13

Oh hey acer! Long time no see!

I think pretty much every halo fan could agree on that. I think 343 agrees too. Remember that tweet that said “competitive focus” “even playing field” and “map control”?

That sounds like a revival of classic halo to me.

14

I agree with the main idea.

But I also agree that we can’t just ask for the same game but “new.”

If we want to go play halo 2, or 3…then now with the Master Chief Collection we’ll be able to which is awesome. Master chief collection is a GOD send to those of us who like playing halo competitively.

But when it comes to any halo now, and specifically, Halo 5…

I just want a REAL ranking system that’s not based off of time spent playing the game…it’s actually based off of stats/performance.

And I want at least the OPTION for a competitive mode. Without loadoats, etc. etc. I really like having everyone start with the same guns with a couple power weapons on the map. That’s what makes the game competitive and what I love about halo. I don’t mind if that’s not the base game…but I definitely want that as an option and in playlists. I basically just play team snipes now on Reach. Couldn’t get into 4 all that much, although it was a pretty solid game…just lost a lot of the competitiveness.

I love Battlefield because of its diversity and chaos and less “arena” style. But I absolutely love Halo also, because it IS an arena style. I don’t want the games to try to become each other.

Really hope they bring back overshields. Or on map powerups.

And really hope they change sniping back to where you can be knocked out of scope etc. (That was a huge thing for me in halo 4…made sniping no fun and took away a TON of the skill of sniping)

Other than that…they can do whatever they want.

I just hope they cater to the competitiveness of Halo…or at least have it as an option.

15

My biggest problem with halo 4 was that the multiplayer felt tacked on. Play something like max payne 3 or far cry 3, and whilst they were fun for about 10 minutes, you could instantly tell where their inspirations came from cough cod cough and so their multiplayers felt tacked on. unfortunately halo 4 did the classic ‘take the franchise in a new direction’ and tried to ‘modernize’ but trying to appeal to the cod and battlefield load out market, like all tacked on multiplayers do, further emphasized by that stupid control scheme. Halo SHOULD be simple because halo IS simple. its simply a SKILL based arena game, not a ‘how many hours do i have to play before i unlock this thing’, which is what i find bad about unlockable abilities and stuff; it takes focus off the game and on to collecting upgrades. but thats sort of seperate from what this is about, sprint and stuff just dont need to be there. a well designed map shouldnt need a sprint feature and armour abilities feel unnecessary.

16

If Halo 5 is to be successful, Loud-outs, Sprint, jetpack, DMR, Bloom, and Ordinance have to be removed.

Loud outs- makes strategizing less effective because there are more possibilities as to what a player can do.

Sprint- ruins set-ups

Jet pack- ruins set up

DMR- Unlike the BR, the DMR gives a player the ability to kill from a great distance effectively. The 3 shot bursts of the BR made you less effective at long range. easier to hit 5 shots than it is to land 12 bullets from 4 shots. DMR makes the kill time faster.

Bloom- power weapons bloom are non existent and would be hard to implement. While the base guns/ guns given at spawn have to deal with significant bloom, making for a more unbalanced gameplay.

Ordinance- More variation in the game. You have take into account in EVERY situation a player could have a rocket launcher or another power weapon. Pre determined power-ups and power weapons make for more predictable outcomes and encourage players to think and

17

> > One of the best things about Halos 1-3 was the fact that it was simple. No sprint, no loadouts, etc.
>
>
>
> > Halo should be complex…
>
> Relevant.
>
> Halo should not be more complex than it is deep. If a game is too complex, than it begins to lose depth. If it is too simple, then it also loses depth. Halo needs some complexity, but not so much that it begins to lose depth, which is what happened with Halo 4.

No, halo 4 wasn’t balances properly and wasn’t [full feature].

18

You’re literally getting Halo 2 and Halo 3 back online, improved.
Along with Halo Ce.
Halo 5 can and should be its own experience.

As for simplicity, no. I’d argue simplicity in depth / the meta really isn’t a good thing unless you’re intentionally trying to make a game catered to more casual (i.e. infrequent) players. Simplicity in regards to how complex the game’s ruleset is, that’s a different topic.

19

> you’re asking them to re-release Halo 1 and call it Halo 5. They’re re-releasing Halo 1 and calling it Halo: The Master Chief Collection. Don’t buy a sequel if you want the original, buy the freaking original.

> You’re literally getting Halo 2 and Halo 3 back online, improved.
> Along with Halo Ce.
> Halo 5 can and should be its own experience.

people aren’t protesting change, and ramirez after arguing the implementation of sprint, perks and ordnance i thought you’d understand that a game can change and still be what people expect, without it resorting to changes that hinder peoples experiences.

i think that is the core issue, some people look at halo 4 and see a halo game…others don’t. But when you have a population that is dead as doorknobs 3 months later and a contingent of players across a variety of platforms (youtube, reddit, facebook, forums) claiming it isn’t a halo game, i think there is a need for a re-evaluation.

you wouldn’t walk into burger king expecting mcdonalds, for many players the changes made in halo 4 do not feel like halo, and with all the posts people like you and i have made ramirez, there is a reason certain implementations aren’t the wisest.

i think there is many changes such as spectator mode, in-game leaderboards, new player abilities/actions/traits and items/item sets to change the way player to player interactions occur to make the game more fun and varied without making it in the players eye un-halo

because at this point in time there is no questioning the reception for halo 4 is generally unfavourable.

i want halo to be experimental, but these changes need to consider certain values the players don’t want changed, because that sure is what halo 4 didn’t do.

20

> Halo should not be more complex than it is deep. If a game is too complex, than it begins to lose depth. If it is too simple, then it also loses depth. Halo needs some complexity, but not so much that it begins to lose depth, which is what happened with Halo 4.

That is not really correct like you said it.
Like you touched one, complex concepts as well as simple concepts require the appropriate amount of depth depending on their complexity or simplicity.
It is rather that when things become complex they can also easily become chaotic when they lack the required depth (like it was the case in H4) while when things become simple they can also easily become dull when they lack depth.

Hence I think it doesn’t really matter if things/ideas are complex or simple, since both can lead to successful as well as to miserable outcomes, but how much grey matter you put into the idea itself and its execution.