I want Halo 4 to be More Like Halo CE and 2

Games Other Halo
1

I have been wanting to make a thread abou this topic for quite a while. I haven’t considered it important enough to be worth it, but as I see the problem not getting better, I finally decided to voice my opinion. Not only for my own good, but also to make my fellow community members more open-minded on the subject.

In the past months I have seen this thread of people either wanting Halo 4 to be a pure remake of Halo 2, 3, or rarely even CE, or wanting Halo 4 to be something totally new. Whether they actually want what they say they want, or just have problems saying what they actually want to say is unknown to me. You see, people either fall into an end of the spectrum, one being that they want Halo 4 to be exactly like a previous Halo game or that they want Halo 4 to be something totally new. But why do we have to be so narrow minded?

Making Halo 4 like some of the older games is very irrational as we already have the game. Of course one could argue that games like Halo CE and 2 don’t have online capabilities anymore. In fact, Halo CE never had, but that’s not my point. I completely understand the point of view, I too would want a true Halo CE or Halo 2 remake with multiplayer and all, but making Halo 4 like that isn’t the best thing to do. If we never explored new things, how could we possibly make anything better. Surely, had Halo CE been like every other FPS at the time, we wouldn’t possibly be discussing here.

What comes to the people on the other end of the spectrum, people who want Halo 4 to be something totally new, you aren’t helping either. Halo already estabilished a near perfect formula with Halo CE. It would make absolutely no sense throwing such a beautiful and working formula away and coming up with a new. On top of that, there would be a high chance the new formula wouldn’t be as succesful.

So, instead of jumping into either end of the spectrum and wanting a Halo CE/2/3 remake, or a game that plays nothing like a previous Halo, why not to preserve the beautiful formula estabilished ten years, but making new additions to further improve that formula? As far as I know, there is nothing inherently wrong with that. We don’t have to be so narrow minded to think that everything is just black and white.

What I mean by this is that Halo 4 should take the formula that made Halo good in the first place and use it as the backbone of Halo. That means not remaking any of the older games, but neither does it mean doing what Reach did and coming up with new core gameplay elements. New additions should be made, but ever addition should only reinforce the estabilished formula, not try to shatter it.

The core gameplay should be built around what made Halo CE and 2 work so well, the simplicity. Maybe add few of the working features from Halo 3 and Reach there and then making new additions that only reinforce the existing features of the core gameplay.

That’s my view on it. If you want a remake of some of the older Halo games, you can possibly go play Halo 3 or download XBConnect. If you want Halo 4 to be something completely new, why not find another game series? As you clearly don’t enjoy the formula of Halo anymore. If you instead want to think about it and understand that everything is not just black and white, you can join me. Surely, while we don’t want a rehash of an old Halo game, we still want to play Halo, right?

2

I support this thread.

3

> I support this thread.

Thank you. This thread haven’t got much attention. Well, at least I can be happy that people have nothing against it.

4

Agreed, but I wouldn’t call Halo 2 simple. The additions changed the formula a lot.

Anyways, these changes would have contributed to CE without changing much:

-AI don’t fire if their allies are in front of them
-AI operating or using explosive weapons don’t fire them if an ally or enemy is too close
-player can swap weapons with ally
-friendly AI prioritization (no prioritization for enemy AI because then they’d be all over the player like in H3 and Reach).
-more distinction in burst fire (i.e. gold Elites fire their plasma rifle more longer). So Majors could fire the way they currently do, in short and accurate bursts. Minors could fire more aggressively but at the cost of accuracy. And Spec Ops Elites could fire in interchanging burst: short and long.
-pushing AI
-slightly increase plasma rifle stun duration. While I’m switching to the pistol, the Elite’s already on the move
-slightly reduce the pistol damage
-increase the plasma pistol bolt battery drain to compensate for high damage (why H2 and H3 does this despite the freaking bolt doing so little damage I do not know)
-sniper rifle could use recoil or bloom
-needler could use a faster rof at the cost of something (that something would not affect the individual needle shard detonation timer or the supercombine)
-AR could use a slight buff

H1 already has:

-actual silenced weapons. In ODST, it’s just aesthetics

-realistic animation velocity (i.e. Goldie sword swing leap, diving Jackal, Grunt, Hunter)

-decent cqc: Elites have a big melee range, making cqc with Elites harder

-balanced combat: simple but effective. Elite Majors are one of my favorite enemies because they’re beatable but they can still catch me by surprise and intimidate me

-balanced health and shielding: player got a recharge rate boost on higher difficulties but so did enemy AI. Enemy AI did much more damage but so did the player

-the difficulty formula: enemy numbers increase, enemy promotion

-friendly AI may be inept but in most cases, but they stick with the Chief. Even Captain Keyes, that -Yoink-, doesn’t get himself into trouble unless the player moves ahead of him or doesn’t kill enemies fast enough (then Keyes will needler enemies and will accidentally detonate them). I recall 2 marines in the 2nd hangar on Cairo Station that were taking cover in 2 locations but then charging into battle, walking straight into the gun fire and getting shot down

-decent vehicle combat. In the other Halo games, I find my hog prone to flipping, often feeling vulnerable while being in a scorpion, and dealing with the pos Ghost that has either poor traction, massive autoaim, and loss of speed when coming in contact with AI (H3) or slams into stuff (no bump like in CE) and flips often (H2). In H1, the only real risk was splattering yourself by accident but even that wasn’t much of a big deal since you could use that collision to get yourself to a better position (speaking of which, if you were driving in a straight path and got out, you could get in the gunner seat, which really speeded up gameplay).

5

I completely agree. This is what I’ve been saying all along!

6

>

To be honest, I wasn’t considering the AI mechanics, just more general gameplay mechanics. That said, I’d like the Halo 4 campaign gameplay be similar to what we had in Halo CE. The weak player shields, bullet sponge enemies, and super fast plasma projectiles in Halo 2, 3 and Reach didn’t allow for very interesting gameplay as you had to utilize cover way too much. Halo CE always had those moments where you could run into the middle of enemies and survive by using your skills.

7

A part of me wants to see a brand new Halo experience that feels somewhat similar to, but ultimately different from the other Halos. Another part of me just wants to see H:CE or H2 “revised.”

If 343i took the core mechanics from CE or H2, and then just added new graphics, new maps, file sharing, forge, great custom game options, improved AI, etc., I would DEFINITELY buy it. They could change the mechanics some degree, so that it doesn’t play the exact same way, but it’d be nice to see a Halo that only slightly varies from the gameplay style of CE or H2. So it’s not like it would be a remake, but the gameplay would be extremely similar.

Personally, I’d like to see Halo be based off of H2 rather than CE, but both games are excellent.

8

I completely agree with this make the core gameplay and what not like CE and 2 and then add cool stuff like armor from 3 and reach and then add a few new things all together. You sir are a very sensable person.

9

> A part of me wants to see a brand new Halo experience that feels somewhat similar to, but ultimately different from the other Halos. Another part of me just wants to see H:CE or H2 “revised.”
>
> If 343i took the core mechanics from CE or H2, and then just added new graphics, new maps, file sharing, forge, great custom game options, improved AI, etc., I would DEFINITELY buy it. They could change the mechanics some degree, so that it doesn’t play the exact same way, but it’d be nice to see a Halo that only slightly varies from the gameplay style of CE or H2. So it’s not like it would be a remake, but the gameplay would be extremely similar.
>
> Personally, I’d like to see Halo be based off of H2 rather than CE, but both games are excellent.

My exact point was that they should preserve the formula of Halo by keeping the core mechanics the same, but at the same time adding new gameplay mechanics that aren’t core mechanics or don’t affect core mechanics. Slight variations are always needed in gameplay. A classic example of this is Halo 3 equipment vs armor abilities. Whereas aromor abilities forced the game to revolve around them, equipment nicely found it’s part around the core gameplay. Equipment didn’t exactly support the core gameplay, but neither did they hinder it.

What comes to what game Halo 4 should be based off, the core mechanics should definitely be derived from Halo CE and 2. All the movement mechanics should be derived from Halo 2, but the weapon sandbox should be derived from Halo CE as it had by far the most working weapon sandbox out of all Halo games. What comes to Halo 3 and Reach, unless you want equipment, neither really had anything that wasn’t in the previous two games and would affect the core mechanics positively.

In shorter words: the gameplay mechanics should go through slight alterations, but nothing that changes the whole nature of the game or affects negatively to gameplay.

10

If they make Halo 4 like halo 2 but make it even better it will make halo 4 be amazing. Halo 2 was god of Mp! So as a developer they have to look back and ask themselves why was halo 2 so great.

Halo 4 wont be like CE.
It most likely will be like Halo2/3

11

> If they make Halo 4 like halo 2 but make it even better it will make halo 4 be amazing. Halo 2 was god of Mp! So as a developer they have to look back and ask themselves why was halo 2 so great.
>
> Halo 4 wont be like CE.
> It most likely will be like Halo2/3

While Halo 2 was a very good game, there are still a bunch of things it did wrong and things that CE did very right. For example, the weapon sandbox I already mentioned. Besides, the campaign gameplay of CE was something no Halo since then has achieved. It was just so fun and unique, never did you feel underpowered even on Legendary because you had a bunch of weapons that could deal serious damage even to Legendary AI. The weapons of CE also worked very well for multiplayer, allowing nearly all weapons to be useful, that’s another thing no Halo game since then has succeeded at.

12

Please Make A Game Mode In Halo 4 With A Better 3-Shot Magnum, Same Code As Original CE… I Have Been A Pizza Party Fan Of CE Since I was 20 Years Old. Im 30 Now, I Miss The Way The Orginal Magnum Brought Competiveness To Halo… It Took Skill, Trigger Control, And Maintaining the Powerups To Be Successful. Thank You For Your Time Reading This. Your Longtime Halo CE Fan- Justin

13

> > If they make Halo 4 like halo 2 but make it even better it will make halo 4 be amazing. Halo 2 was god of Mp! So as a developer they have to look back and ask themselves why was halo 2 so great.
> >
> > Halo 4 wont be like CE.
> > It most likely will be like Halo2/3
>
> While Halo 2 was a very good game, there are still a bunch of things it did wrong and things that CE did very right. For example, the weapon sandbox I already mentioned. Besides, the campaign gameplay of CE was something no Halo since then has achieved. It was just so fun and unique, never did you feel underpowered even on Legendary because you had a bunch of weapons that could deal serious damage even to Legendary AI. The weapons of CE also worked very well for multiplayer, allowing nearly all weapons to be useful, that’s another thing no Halo game since then has succeeded at.

Halo 2 had weapon combos that made unfair I agree about stuff like that. But other than the glitches and mods the game was perfect.
Dual Weapons was great.
I never felt underpowered in Halo 2 it was a thinking game and knowing your weapons.
Even so we can agree that Halo CE and Halo 2 are the best Halos.

Halo 3 and Reach went down hill…

14

> > > If they make Halo 4 like halo 2 but make it even better it will make halo 4 be amazing. Halo 2 was god of Mp! So as a developer they have to look back and ask themselves why was halo 2 so great.
> > >
> > > Halo 4 wont be like CE.
> > > It most likely will be like Halo2/3
> >
> > While Halo 2 was a very good game, there are still a bunch of things it did wrong and things that CE did very right. For example, the weapon sandbox I already mentioned. Besides, the campaign gameplay of CE was something no Halo since then has achieved. It was just so fun and unique, never did you feel underpowered even on Legendary because you had a bunch of weapons that could deal serious damage even to Legendary AI. The weapons of CE also worked very well for multiplayer, allowing nearly all weapons to be useful, that’s another thing no Halo game since then has succeeded at.
>
> Halo 2 had weapon combos that made unfair I agree about stuff like that. But other than the glitches and mods the game was perfect.
> Dual Weapons was great.
> I never felt underpowered in Halo 2 it was a thinking game and knowing your weapons.
> Even so we can agree that Halo CE and Halo 2 are the best Halos.
>
> Halo 3 and Reach went down hill…

On a side note, I would say that button combos made the game much better than it would’ve been without them. But that’s not the main point here. What comes to the weapon sandbox, the Halo 2 sandbox, while not as bad as the Halo 3 weapon sandbox, still didn’t have the weapon sandbox balance that Halo CE could provide. Most weapons were a viable option only when dual wielded.

15

Well, I’l be getting this game purely for the campaign, the multiplayer could be something I’m utterly bored and uninterested in (say, identical to CE) and I’d still buy it. But the campaign has to feel new and different, because all the campaigns to date have fallen so far short of what they could’ve been, and I don’t want Halo 4 to go down this route. Especially considering it holds far more potential than any of the previous installments.

16

> > > If they make Halo 4 like halo 2 but make it even better it will make halo 4 be amazing. Halo 2 was god of Mp! So as a developer they have to look back and ask themselves why was halo 2 so great.
> > >
> > > Halo 4 wont be like CE.
> > > It most likely will be like Halo2/3
> >
> > While Halo 2 was a very good game, there are still a bunch of things it did wrong and things that CE did very right. For example, the weapon sandbox I already mentioned. Besides, the campaign gameplay of CE was something no Halo since then has achieved. It was just so fun and unique, never did you feel underpowered even on Legendary because you had a bunch of weapons that could deal serious damage even to Legendary AI. The weapons of CE also worked very well for multiplayer, allowing nearly all weapons to be useful, that’s another thing no Halo game since then has succeeded at.
>
> Halo 2 had weapon combos that made unfair I agree about stuff like that. But other than the glitches and mods the game was perfect.
> Dual Weapons was great.
> I never felt underpowered in Halo 2 it was a thinking game and knowing your weapons.
> Even so we can agree that Halo CE and Halo 2 are the best Halos.
>
> Halo 3 and Reach went down hill…

Halo 3 went downhill? How so? I’d say, Halo 3: ODST is when they started going downhill.

17

> Halo 3 went downhill? How so? I’d say, Halo 3: ODST is when they started going downhill.

How would you define downhill? If it’s downhill in terms of sales, Halo hasn’t started to go downhill yet. If it’s in terms of competitive value of the gameplay, Halo started to go downhill with Halo 2. Therefore I’d say that unless it’s in terms of competitive value, I’d say Halo is doing rather well, even after Reach.

18

> >
>
> To be honest, I wasn’t considering the AI mechanics, just more general gameplay mechanics. That said, I’d like the Halo 4 campaign gameplay be similar to what we had in Halo CE.
>
> The weak player shields, bullet sponge enemies, and super fast plasma projectiles in Halo 2, 3 and Reach didn’t allow for very interesting gameplay as you had to utilize cover way too much.
>
> Halo CE always had those moments where you could run into the middle of enemies and survive by using your skills.

The general gameplay mechanics would be meaningless without proper AI. But I agree.

Again, I agree. Cover emphasis is something suitable for tactical shooters. But Halo was never meant to be a tactical shooter.

Speaking of fast plasma projectiles, in Reach, on Heroic and lower, the plasma rifle bolts are slow enough to be avoided. If you’re left with 1 Elite, just weave and crouch (imitate the Elites in their evasive maneuver firing) and you’ll take him down with your shield intact. I’ve tested this with Ultra Elites. But on Legendary, all the projectiles get a speed increase. It’s virtually impossible to fight plasma rifle Elites close-medium range without getting hit. It kills cqc (even more because of how fast and strong their melees are and how durable their unshielded armor is).

Ype. CE had something to remember. There’s nothing more satisfying than laying waste to a large number of Covies with your shield barely intact. I’ve willingly forgotten most of the memories from my H2 and H3 playing days because there wasn’t much value in them. The only thing I still remember is my Councilor army.

The formula has changed from fun to difficulty. Ever since H2, it has been believed that making AI tougher makes them appear smarter since they last longer. It may have fooled most people but it hasn’t fooled me.

> It most likely will be like Halo2/3

That… would be very unfortunate.

> Halo 3 went downhill? How so? I’d say, Halo 3: ODST is when they started going downhill.

Technically, Halo 2 is when they started going downhill, because that was the loss of balanced gameplay and the transition of Halo into a tactical shooter. But since it was fun for many, this kind of change was tolerable.

But then Halo 3 came along. Inferior quality, slower and worsened gameplay. Halo 3 was indeed the beginning of the end. Of course, this too was fun for many, this kind of change was tolerable, albeit barely.

Finally Reach, in it’s attempt to rival other shooters, lost it’s identity. It was supposed to be about the fall of Reach. It only showed a small and hardly significant portion of it. If it had tried to be purely a Halo game, it could have succeeded. Halo should never conform like the other shooter games have done.

19

I want Halo 4 to be like Halo 4.

20

When people say that they want Halo 4 to play like the first trilogy they aren’t asking for a complete remake of a previous game. They just want the gameplay to be similar by sticking to the same Halo formula, I don’t know why people don’t understand that.

I also don’t understand how someone could want Halo 4 to play like something completely different then what Halo is supposed to be. How do you know you would even enjoy it? Halo 4 can innovate without changing the core gameplay.