The community is constantly going on about how Halo 4 is the downfall of Halo and “Why can’t Halo 4 be like Halo 3?”, but what I don’t understand is, if you want Halo 4 to be Halo 3, then… Why don’t you play Halo 3? They complain loadouts and ordnance should be removed… What does that leave you with? Halo 3? Instead of not changing multiplayer from Halo 3 to 4 and having the same thing, but worse due to sprinting, etc that wasn’t designed to fit with Halo 3’s style of gameplay, they made something different, so that there is a Halo for both kinds of gamers. It really makes no sense to me why they want Halo 4 to be Halo 3, when they could play Halo 3! Now there is something different that some people hate, and some people love more than Halo 3. So it works out in the end as a successful product and expands the variety of Halo. What exactly by removing these things do you expect to be different from Halo 3? It really makes no sense to me.
I can understand that some people are disappointed with the game, can’t please everybody.
What I can’t understand is why people still post in the Halo 4 forum when they “quit the game months ago”.
It’s always been like this, Why is 2 so different from CE? Why is 3 so different from 2? It’s an endless circle
People don’t want a carbon copy of halo 3, but for it to be inspired by it. Halo 4 is pretty much Reach inspired (which plenty did not want a direct continuation of). It’s is straying more and more from its roots.
Halo 3 imo was the last “good” halo game. Reach being arguably decent…then Halo 4…
Well, a lot of it is due to the fact that many mechanics introduced into Halo 4 were quite broken. Things like perks (which they made by stripping default player traits in order to utilise effectively), progression unlocks, Camo, Promethean vision or the boltshot. All of these things are fundamentally flawed in one way or another.
What doesn’t help the fact, is that instead of launching with the promised classic playlist, 343i decided to wait for seven months before introducing anything remotely resembling classic, and even that hasn’t been recieved well for a number of reasons.
When people say they want the game to be more like Halo 3, (and I don’t speak for everyone) chances are what they mean is that it should be based off of Halo 3.
You have to remember, Reach let down a lot of people. So when Halo 4 came around people were hoping 343i might have learnt from Bungies mistakes, and go back to the traditional gameplay. Instead, we got something that built off of Reach, and arguably in the worst direction possible.
That doesn’t mean they don’t want it to change, or grow or expand. But just because it did change, doesn’t mean the change was for the better or that people have to magically like it.
Halo, in my opinion, can grow as a game without stomping out the traditional gameplay that the populace fell in love with.
Yes, but even if they are disappointed with the game, then they can go back to the game they want Halo 4 to be instead of saying the Halo 4’s new amazing style of multiplayer should be altogether removed and be a copy of a game they already have access to and can play whenever they want.
> People don’t want a carbon copy of halo 3, but for it to be inspired by it. Halo 4 is pretty much Reach inspired (which plenty did not want a direct continuation of). It’s is straying more and more from its roots.
>
> Halo 3 imo was the last “good” halo game. Reach being arguably decent…then Halo 4…
I think ODST was the last great game, but under different circumstances.
Probably because Halo 3 is six years old and we want something new?
Everyone wants new features and improvements. However, the majority of Halo’s fans didn’t like the new features and improvements that Halo 4 brought. New features are welcome, but not if they break or change the gameplay for the worse. It’s as simple as that.
> Yes, but even if they are disappointed with the game, then they can go back to the game they want Halo 4 to be instead of saying the Halo 4’s new amazing style of multiplayer should be altogether removed and be a copy of a game they already have access to and can play whenever they want.
Nobody should have to go back to an older game.
dbl post sorry
> > The community is constantly going on about how Halo 4 is the downfall of Halo and “Why can’t Halo 4 be like Halo 3?”, but what I don’t understand is, if you want Halo 4 to be Halo 3, then… Why don’t you play Halo 3?
>
> Because this is one of the worst arguments you can possibly tell to people who don’t like Halo 4. And also when will people finally understand that Halo 3 isn’t supported anymore in terms of playlists.
@Vektor0
Just because something is old doesn’t mean you need something new. We got something new, Halo 4. And the fact that millions of people actually do like Halo 4 proves on its own that Halo 4 wasn’t changed for the worse. But I am talking about the people who complain for Halo 4 to be exactly like Halo 3.
You can play whatever Halo you want, but the people in specific I am talking about want Halo 4 to literally have all aspects of Halo 3, essentially making it Halo 3.5 with new guns and maps. I understand if you want Halo 3 with new features, but the people in specific I am talking about want it to basically be Halo 3.5, Halo 3 with new guns and maps. Which in that case I would have no problem just playing Halo 3
What features would you like to have added on to a Halo 3 based Halo? You know, what you guys who don’t like Halo 4 think it should have been? I can’t think of anything except better forge, new weapons and vehicles, etc.
> Halo, in my opinion, can grow as a game without stomping out the traditional gameplay that the populace fell in love with.
Its so funny to me that all the advocates of “its straying from its roots and needs to go back to the popular FPS gameplay of ten years ago” keep saying stuff like the above, i.e. it can change without ruining the traditional gameplay, but don’t seem to have any articuable concrete suggestions for what that means. What Bungie (with Reach), and 343 (with H4) have done seems to me to be a direct continuation of the “traditional gameplay” with new elements added on (I’ll grant that some things were removed or limited, via the perk system, but most of those removals were justified for one reason or another, IMO).
When I played CE, 2, and 3, what I did was jump around and grenade/shoot/melee people, wait for my shield to recharge during after an engagement, mow people down w/ warthog/scorpion, ninja unsuspecting opponents, crouch to go off radar and get the jump on people or sneak around to objectives, headshot, headshot, headshot, try to acquire powerweapons at the start of the map and on respawns, and hold down dominant map positions.
With Halo 4, guess what, I still do all of those things! Hence, this gameplay has built directly off of the prior gameplay. All of the above are still valid usable tactics in this game, which, when properly executed with team support/collaboration, generally result in a win. However, now I’m able to do so much more as well! Now I can sprint to/from cover, rather than slog slowly around while still getting shot in the back. Now I can jetpack to cool new locations/angles of attack, or fool someone with hologram, or thruster ninja someone, etc. etc. etc. Now I can try out seven different primary weapons at spawn instead of same old thing everytime. Now, when I get a little bored of playing, I can switch up my loadout entirely and master a new AA, or different playstyle! The core is still there, there are just many new exiting layers which keep the game fresh and interesting to me!
So, unless you can actually suggest some concrete updates to the H3 formula (and insist on declining to recognize that bungie and 343 already updated that formula with fun, new, non-gamebreaking elements, while still keeping the essence of Halo) then just stop whining and go play Halo 3.
CE, 2, 3, and Reach were all a blast when I played them. But by the time the next iteration came out, they felt outdated and rather boring. I have absolutely no need to go back to a reskinned version of those games, and in fact, were such a game released as the new Halo, I wouldn’t play it, and would either return to 4 or switch to a new franchise. So if you can’t suggest any specific gameplay updates, just stop spouting your nonesense about “evolving while staying true to the roots,” because it should be obvious to anyone with an iota of logical reasoning prowess and common sense recognition that that is exactly what bungie and 343 did!
From which “few millions of people” you are speaking? The like 30k people per day playing it?
Just because a game sold millions, doesn’t mean it’s good or stands for the trademarks of the series. Many people avoided spoilers (reveal campaign footage) and gameplay videos (even multiplayer). And also many people just bought it for campaign and story. And “some” others bought it because the first MLG gameplay on E3 actually looked promising and didn’t had all the stupid stuff like the Boltshot.
Halo 4s population dropped faster than Reachs after release. Pretty much shows how “amazing” this game is.
Also you have TONS of suggestions here in this forum. If you only read page 1, this is your fault. Stop telling people to go back. You can like your game, but right now you are just a fanboy in my eyes. And fanboys are the worst tbh. You also have given no really valid arguments why Halo 4 improved the original series’ gameplay. Yeah, perks and custom loadouts. Does it mean it fits into Halo? No. Any other game has it, making this game LESS original. How is THAT an improvement?
Oh my Lord, sir, I couldn’t have explained it better. :'D Although I do think Halo 3 is still an amazingly fun game.
I meant to say at least a million.
And not everybody who has is plays everyday. People have lives and jobs and kids and responsibilities to attend to. If they didn’t I’d assume maybe around 80-90 thousand a day would play. 
> @GalaxySpider
>
> I meant to say at least a million.
> And not everybody who has is plays everyday. People have lives and jobs and kids and responsibilities to attend to. If they didn’t I’d assume maybe around 80-90 thousand a day would play.
Let’s assume that an average Halo player plays at least once a week.
40k players in a day x 7 days a week = 280k players.
That’s a maximum if we also assume that all players only play once a week. Some, like myself, play several times a week. I don’t know where you get this “at least a million” number from, but it’s not statistical in the slightest.
@Vektor0
I was also referring to people who don’t have the game too, but based on information they know about the game, like the game, think it is a good idea, and would like to play the game at least once every 2 weeks because they like it. How many people do you think can’t fork out the 60 dollars for the game but still like it?
And what about people who do have the game, like it, but just don’t play it? I love Battlefield 3 but I haven’t played that game in about 4 months,
> @Vektor0
> I was also referring to people who don’t have the game too, but based on information they know about the game, like the game, think it is a good idea, and would like to play the game at least once every 2 weeks because they like it. How many people do you think can’t fork out the 60 dollars for the game but still like it?
So your argument is that the reason Halo 4 lacks population is that they like the game, just not enough to spend $60 to pay for it? O_o
First of all, Halo 4’s first-day sales set a record for the franchise. The demand was there. Millions of people bought the game. Halo 4 didn’t deliver for some reason, so few of them stuck around.
Further, if that’s the case, how come other successful franchises such as Call of Duty or Battlefield don’t have this problem?
The problem isn’t that Halo 4 changed to something that’s not Halo 3. The problem is that only a small number of people liked Halo 4’s changes (no more than 25%, based on crude guesstimations. Don’t take that as a fact; it’s not.).
If someone asks for icing on their cake, so you put icing on their cake but they don’t like it, you don’t tell them to eat the cake without the icing. You put different icing on the cake.
> And what about people who do have the game, like it, but just don’t play it? I love Battlefield 3 but I haven’t played that game in about 4 months,
Battlefield 3 is two years old. Halo 4 is nine months old. If a game retained you for nearly two years, it must have been good. Halo 3 did the same for many people. However, Halo 4 lost the majority of its population in the first few months.
> @BozemANGELES
>
> Oh my Lord, sir, I couldn’t have explained it better. :'D Although I do think Halo 3 is still an amazingly fun game.
>
> @GalaxySpider
>
> I meant to say at least a million.
> And not everybody who has is plays everyday. People have lives and jobs and kids and responsibilities to attend to. If they didn’t I’d assume maybe around 80-90 thousand a day would play.
While I agree that people have lives and stuff to do, the same was true during the days of halo reach, 3, etc. So I don’t think that’s a good excuse.
“If someone asks for icing on their cake, so you put icing on their cake but they don’t like it, you don’t tell them to eat the cake without the icing. You put different icing on the cake.”
Oh, so its time to play the false analogy game, then? Okay, I can play too. Halo 4 offers many varied flavors of icing for you too choose, and if the most prevalent and popular flavor of icing on this particular cake is not to your taste, then simply don’t eat it, and go eat one of the other flavors (i.e. legendary, throwdown, get a party and vote for pro variants), or just regurgiate your halo 3 cake and eat that again. At the very least, why don’t you suggest a recipe for the type of icing you would like on the Halo 3 cake that adds enough flavor to keep those of us who appreciate the Infinity icing to want to keep eating. Otherwise, leave it to the bakers (343) to decide on what icings they shall offer, and buy their product only if it suits your taste.