I don't want halo 3/2.5,i want halo 4

First than all,there’s been 2 years of developing so this kind of post don’t really help so much changing the final game.

Now,a lot of people want Halo 3 g2ameplay,they want to “keep Halo like Halo”,i mean,really,why can’t you accept that it evolves,why don’t you want all Halos to be like Halo 3,instead of evolving?,and i mean evolving in real,a real change,because “It´s COD,not Halo”?,well then remove multiplayer,campaign,jump,crouch,guns movement etc…,because tey’re in CoD too.

Come on people,who cares if it’s in CoD or not?,who cares if it’s Halo or not?,all that matters it’s the fun/joyment of playing,not if it’s Halo or CoD.

Or is it the case that i’m alone in this?

I mean,i agree that i want Halo to be Halo,but not to the extreme,i mean,do you really want Halo 4 to be a Halo 2 remake?

The point is,as the title says,Halo 4 to be different,obvously not taking it to the extreme,but different,like Reach does.

I just don’t want another Reach…

You should check your grammar before hitting post.

When you see “this is Halo, not COD” that means that the feature they are talking about would NOT be fun and would NOT fit Halo. Halo should evolve but Reach did it the wrong way, reducing jump height, movement speed, bringing bloom, AA’s and all the other crap reach brought. It did not feel like Halo, it was not FUN like Halo or at all, it was a fail.

Halo4 should be a sequel to Halo3 not Halo Reach.

> You should check your grammar before hitting post.
> Halo 4 should be a sequel to Halo 3 not Halo Reach.

This, right here.

You catch it the wrong way,i’m not saying it should be like Reach,i said it should be different,and i did put Reach as an Example because it is the “Less Haloish Halo”.

Sorry about the grammar,i’m i na lap top with an smaller keyboard i’m used to,so i change or add letters.

If Halo 4 is anything like Halo 3 that would be weird. Especially since there’s been so much change in the franchise including a new developer.

> Halo4 should be a sequel to Halo3 not Halo Reach.

this.

> > Halo4 should be a sequel to Halo3 not Halo Reach.
>
> this.

Now read the Whole topic and post again

2 year of dev? so the game is in dev since 2009?

Do you realize how stupid that argument is? “I do not want Halo 2.5.” Then what the heck is Halo 4? Because as far as I know, the number at the end of the title indicates that this is a continuation to the first title, and similarities will be there in a certain order. So you’re not asking for Halo 4, you’re asking for something else.

As for your “FUN” argument, that is entirely OPINION! Fun is determined by the player and Halo was once known for it’s competitive gameplay which made it fun for the majority. Now, the minority is the majority because 700,000 people have quit playing and 10,000 are on Halo 3 because REACH IS NOT WHAT HALO WAS ABOUT!

> Do you realize how stupid that argument is? “I do not want Halo 2.5.” Then what the heck is Halo 4? Because as far as I know, the number at the end of the title indicates that this is a continuation to the first title, and similarities will be there in a certain order. So you’re not asking for Halo 4, you’re asking for something else.

> Do you realize how stupid that argument is? “I do not want Halo 2.5.” Then what the heck is Halo 4? Because as far as I know, the number at the end of the title indicates that this is a continuation to the first title, and similarities will be there in a certain order. So you’re not asking for Halo 4, you’re asking for something else.
>
>
> As for your “FUN” argument, that is entirely OPINION! Fun is determined by the player and Halo was once known for it’s competitive gameplay which made it fun for the majority. Now, the minority is the majority because 700,000 people have quit playing and 10,000 are on Halo 3 because REACH IS NOT WHAT HALO WAS ABOUT!

First,with 2.5 i mean that,Halo 2 with new stuff.

Second,the title says it,“I don’t want”,it’s my own opinion.

So,the fact i can choose the AA i’m most confortable with as all the other players make it less competitive?,i would say Reach gave you more options,but well,from the very start this all was nothing but my personal opinion.

Let’s be honest here. No matter what 343 does, people are going to be disappointed. There’s no way around it.

For that exact reason, I don’t like hte fact that 343 is trying to live up to Bungie’s Legacy. I would prefer to see 343 do what they think is the right direction the Halo series to go in. Honestly f*** the die hard fans. screw this whole Halo 4 should be like halo 2 or 3 or halo ce bla bla bla.

343 has enough talent that they should create their own vision…not follow the vision of somebody else.

Yeah im pretty sure that the statistics prove that halo 2 and halo 3 were the way the game should be played BECAUSE THEY WERE MAKING MILLIONS MORE DOLLARS ON IT! Not to mention the servers are dead now to fiery storm of CoD players. But back in the day Halo 3 and H2 had such a dedicated population it actually competed against cod.

Dont get me started on how trash it is that the most popular list these days is SWAT and living dead… Like come on really??? There more people in Team snipers on HALO 3 then there is in most if not all the Anniversary playlists, and a couple others in reach… That tells you people didnt even care enough about H1 to give multiplayer another go…

Sorry but your wrong Halo 4 does need to be a Halo 3 Halo 2 hybrid if they wanna get the fans back and have them actually stay. Halo does need to evolve, but it didnt with reach at all and pretty much proved when you pile in a bunch ideas from other games and jam them into a shotgun shell and fire it just to see what sticks FAILS.

Yeah Halo need to evolve but not by completely going side track with ideas that are might I say already OVER USED in video games. By the way if you get what you want competitive Halo will pretty much cease to exist and Frank O’Conner has said and does value his relationship with MLG… Hense why he gave MLG the no bloom slayer settings weeks before the TU playlist. But you wouldnt know a thing about that considering you play squad battle, griffball, multi team and living dead most of your halo hours.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG!

> > Do you realize how stupid that argument is? “I do not want Halo 2.5.” Then what the heck is Halo 4? Because as far as I know, the number at the end of the title indicates that this is a continuation to the first title, and similarities will be there in a certain order. So you’re not asking for Halo 4, you’re asking for something else.
> >
> >
> > As for your “FUN” argument, that is entirely OPINION! Fun is determined by the player and Halo was once known for it’s competitive gameplay which made it fun for the majority. Now, the minority is the majority because 700,000 people have quit playing and 10,000 are on Halo 3 because REACH IS NOT WHAT HALO WAS ABOUT!
>
> First,with 2.5 i mean that,Halo 2 with new stuff.
>
> Second,the title says it,“I don’t want”,it’s my own opinion.
>
> So,the fact i can choose the AA i’m most confortable with as all the other players make it less competitive?,i would say Reach gave you more options,but well,from the very start this all was nothing but my personal opinion.

Having an advantage off spawn is not competitive. Earning the advantage for playing smart due to gametypes and map choice is.

HALO 2 WITH NEW STUFF?!?!?!? THEN THAT WOULDN’T BE HALO 2! IT WOULD BE HALO 4! THERE IS ONLY ONE HALO 2 AND THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE HALO 4 AS THERE IS A HALO CE! SO THAT MAKES YOUR ARGUMENT REDUNDANT!!!

> First,with 2.5 i mean that,Halo 2 with new stuff.

Well, why did you use such a misleading term instead of just saying Halo 2 with new stuff? The number of the sequel never refers to the gameplay of the game, it refers to the time where the game takes place, e.g. Halo 2.5 would be a game that takes place between Halo 2 and 3.

But what comes to the real subject of this thread, yes Halo 4 should take some features from the older games. This is purely because those features were the most succesful and the best out of all games. These features are mostly core gameplay features. Good sequels are always made so that you take the core of the previous succesful game and build around it, not start changing it drastically until it feels like a whole another game.

This makes no sense. Anyway Reach was not that fun. Halo 3 was. See why we want it?

> > First,with 2.5 i mean that,Halo 2 with new stuff.
>
> Well, why did you use such a misleading term instead of just saying Halo 2 with new stuff? The number of the sequel never refers to the gameplay of the game, it refers to the time where the game takes place, e.g. Halo 2.5 would be a game that takes place between Halo 2 and 3.

I really can’t stand how people like you don’t use your common sense to make out what he means. Trust me, it really isn’t that hard to use your brain to figure it out. It really seems like your just trying to sound like a smart -Yoink- and to tell us how stupid OP is for his “misleading term”.

I agree that Halo 4 should evolve but it should also keep to the core mechanics that the first trilogy had going well. I don’t wanna start calling Halo 4 just 4 because it doesn’t feel “Halo” enough.

> > > First,with 2.5 i mean that,Halo 2 with new stuff.
> >
> > Well, why did you use such a misleading term instead of just saying Halo 2 with new stuff? The number of the sequel never refers to the gameplay of the game, it refers to the time where the game takes place, e.g. Halo 2.5 would be a game that takes place between Halo 2 and 3.
>
> I really can’t stand how many people like you aren’t using your common sense to make out what he actually meant. Trust me, it really isn’t that hard to use your brain to figure it out. It really seems like your just trying to sound like a smart -Yoink!- and to tell us how stupid OP is for his “misleading term”.

I know very well what he actually meant. I see absoluely no reason to bash my mental capabilities just because I happen to point out a little thing that frustrates me. I wasn’t saying anything bad about OP’s level of intelligence, I simply pointed out that the term OP was using, while may seem fitting for the intention, is not and just makes the OP look like a misinformed person with nothing to back up their argument.

No one here is trying to act smart, you’re angry at me over nothing. So why couldn’t we all just calm down, stop bashing eachother and instead give our reasons why Halo 4 should or shouldn’t have gameplay similarities to previous games.

But let’s not use terms like Halo 2.5 or 3.5. They make the user look like they were terribly misinformed on the subject and wanted Halo 4 to be fundamentally different from other Halo games.

> Let’s be honest here. No matter what 343 does, people are going to be disappointed. There’s no way around it.
>
> For that exact reason, I don’t like hte fact that 343 is trying to live up to Bungie’s Legacy. I would prefer to see 343 do what they think is the right direction the Halo series to go in. Honestly f*** the die hard fans. screw this whole Halo 4 should be like halo 2 or 3 or halo ce bla bla bla.
>
> 343 has enough talent that they should create their own vision…not follow the vision of somebody else.

This.