If i worked at 343 i wouldn´t take you seriously because...

1-You practically say “Oh yoink you 343, let us make the game” in a “polite” way.

2- There are just 109 active people on this forum( And not EVERY one hates change)

3-The game is going to sell a lot of copies and most folks are going to like it (Those “Casuals” are fans just like you, that should be considered just like you).

Note: If you really despise change that much, just keep playing Halo 3 forever and let the rest of us Enjoy Halo.

Excuse my Grammar(English is not my native lenguaje)

This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

Really, thanks a lot for this thread. It just cleared up so many things for me. I don’t know what I would have done if I didn’t stumble upon this. A great read and a thread that absolutely must be favorited. A+. You certainly are a future 343i cadet member of the week poster.

I agree whole heartedly. I’ve posted in the past that if I wanted 343 to 1 thing when developing Halo 4, it would be to ignore the online community and create the game they want.

There is one thing you people who complain about the opinions of other people tend to ignore over and over again. We don’t hate change, there is nothing wrong with change as long as it makes sense, helps the game be more unigue and makes the game better. Unfortunately, none of the change 343i are bringing to Halo fullfil this criteria. Sprint, loadouts and perks aren’t innovative, nor do they improve the gameplay in any way, nor do they make the game more unique. They’re simply there to make the game appeal to the majority of gamers who can’t play a game if it doesn’t have sprint, customizable classes and a progression system.

There certainly is nothing wrong with change in itself. The problem is the change that lowers the quality of gameplay and makes the game less unique in an attempt to get higher sales figures. All that because AAA game studios are too afraid to try new things because there is too much money at stake, that’s why they take the approach of what’s popular instead of what’s good for the game.

> 3-The game is going to sell a lot of copies and most folks are going to like it (Those “Casuals” are fans just like you, that should be considered just like you).

Casuals do out number every one else, since the main thing for gaming is to have fun.

> There is one thing you people who complain about the opinions of other people tend to ignore over and over again. We don’t hate change, there is nothing wrong with change as long as it makes sense, helps the game be more unigue and makes the game better. Unfortunately, none of the change 343i are bringing to Halo fullfil this criteria. Sprint, loadouts and perks aren’t innovative, nor do they improve the gameplay in any way, nor do they make the game more unique. They’re simply there to make the game appeal to the majority of gamers who can’t play a game if it doesn’t have sprint, customizable classes and a progression system.
>
> There certainly is nothing wrong with change in itself. The problem is the change that lowers the quality of gameplay and makes the game less unique in an attempt to get higher sales figures. All that because AAA game studios are too afraid to try new things because there is too much money at stake, that’s why they take the approach of what’s popular instead of what’s good for the game.

Can you Please Explain your point?

Don´t try to turn subjective into objective

3 4 3 I > B u n g i e

> > 3-The game is going to sell a lot of copies and most folks are going to like it (Those “Casuals” are fans just like you, that should be considered just like you).
>
> Casuals do out number every one else, since the main thing for gaming is to have fun.

“Casuals” is very subjective.

Under the logic of this forum, i´m a “casual”, since i don´t play Halo everyday.

Thus, i play other games, so in general i´m not a casual.

Also, you can or not be casual basing on the fact that a lot of my free tiem is dedicated to Videogames.

> > There is one thing you people who complain about the opinions of other people tend to ignore over and over again. We don’t hate change, there is nothing wrong with change as long as it makes sense, helps the game be more unigue and makes the game better. Unfortunately, none of the change 343i are bringing to Halo fullfil this criteria. Sprint, loadouts and perks aren’t innovative, nor do they improve the gameplay in any way, nor do they make the game more unique. They’re simply there to make the game appeal to the majority of gamers who can’t play a game if it doesn’t have sprint, customizable classes and a progression system.
> >
> > There certainly is nothing wrong with change in itself. The problem is the change that lowers the quality of gameplay and makes the game less unique in an attempt to get higher sales figures. All that because AAA game studios are too afraid to try new things because there is too much money at stake, that’s why they take the approach of what’s popular instead of what’s good for the game.
>
> Can you Please Explain your point?
>
> Don´t try to turn subjective into objective

My points are uniqueness, balance and depth of gameplay. Notice that all of these are very objective. Uniqueness is amount of difference when comparing to another object, balance is player’s chances of beating another player when skill is irrelevant, depth is the combined amount and complexity of strategies a player can employ. All tied by mathematics, therefore all objective.

Sprint takes away uniqueness of the game while being neutral in case of balance and depth. As the values are negative, neutral, neutral; the effect of sprint is negative. With loadouts it’s either negative, negative, negative or negative, neutral, neutral. For that, you can do the math. And finally, for perks it’s the same possibilities as it’s for loadouts.

I understand I didn’t tell why I gave those values. All that information can be found in the numerous threads discussing the effects of all those features. But the general point of my post is that such features only harm those three attributes of the game that, in my personal opinion, are very important to the game.

> 3 4 3 I > B u n g i e

Whoa now, let’s be rational here. Let them create their own game first.

> 1-You practically say “Oh yoink you 343, let us make the game” in a “polite” way.
>
> 2- There are just 109 active people on this forum( And not EVERY one hates change)
>
> 3-The game is going to sell a lot of copies and most folks are going to like it (Those “Casuals” are fans just like you, that should be considered just like you).
>
> Note: If you really despise change that much, just keep playing Halo 3 forever and let the rest of us Enjoy Halo.
>
> Excuse my Grammar(English is not my native lenguaje)

I understand that there are alot more casual players than competitive players, but should the competitive players be ignored?

I play everyday for great periods at a time, and I have been playing since Halo 2. I am a tremendous fan of the Halo franchise, and I have all the faith in the worl that 343 will hopefully make a great game, and not another horrible version of Halo: rEach.

But for you to sit here and say that they should just disregard the competitive, and more dedicated community is one of the most ignorant, stupid, and selfish things to date.

People like you as a conglomerate are why games can take a turn for the worst, and change is a good thing but for love of god do you want to play Halo or a version of COD in space?

Halo 2, and Halo 3 are p[rime examples of a good Halo game. Halo: Reach is a prime example of change can take a huge turn for the worst, and is a big indicator of what direction not to go in.

So please learn a little bit, and be open minded before you post random BS.

> > > 3-The game is going to sell a lot of copies and most folks are going to like it (Those “Casuals” are fans just like you, that should be considered just like you).
> >
> > Casuals do out number every one else, since the main thing for gaming is to have fun.
>
> “Casuals” is very subjective.
>
> Under the logic of this forum, i´m a “casual”, since i don´t play Halo everyday.
>
> Thus, i play other games, so in general i´m not a casual.
>
> Also, you can or not be casual basing on the fact that a lot of my free tiem is dedicated to Videogames.

On the forums, casual gamer normally means they play for fun, not competitive.

> > > There is one thing you people who complain about the opinions of other people tend to ignore over and over again. We don’t hate change, there is nothing wrong with change as long as it makes sense, helps the game be more unigue and makes the game better. Unfortunately, none of the change 343i are bringing to Halo fullfil this criteria. Sprint, loadouts and perks aren’t innovative, nor do they improve the gameplay in any way, nor do they make the game more unique. They’re simply there to make the game appeal to the majority of gamers who can’t play a game if it doesn’t have sprint, customizable classes and a progression system.
> > >
> > > There certainly is nothing wrong with change in itself. The problem is the change that lowers the quality of gameplay and makes the game less unique in an attempt to get higher sales figures. All that because AAA game studios are too afraid to try new things because there is too much money at stake, that’s why they take the approach of what’s popular instead of what’s good for the game.
> >
> > Can you Please Explain your point?
> >
> > Don´t try to turn subjective into objective
>
> My points are uniqueness, balance and depth of gameplay. Notice that all of these are very objective. Uniqueness is amount of difference when comparing to another object, balance is player’s chances of beating another player when skill is irrelevant, depth is the combined amount and complexity of strategies a player can employ. All tied by mathematics, therefore all objective.
>
> Sprint takes away uniqueness of the game while being neutral in case of balance and depth. As the values are negative, neutral, neutral; the effect of sprint is negative. With loadouts it’s either negative, negative, negative or negative, neutral, neutral. For that, you can do the math. And finally, for perks it’s the same possibilities as it’s for loadouts.
>
> I understand I didn’t tell why I gave those values. All that information can be found in the numerous threads discussing the effects of all those features. But the general point of my post is that such features only harm those three attributes of the game that, in my personal opinion, are very important to the game.

So you assume is going to work like CoD?

I spawn with DMR and magnum, you spawn with AR and magnum.

I preffer DMR, you preffer AR, so each one uses the weapon he wants.

Where´s the unbalance?

> So you assume is going to work like CoD?
>
> I spawn with DMR and magnum, you spawn with AR and magnum.
>
> I preffer DMR, you preffer AR, so each one uses the weapon he wants.
>
> Where´s the unbalance?

With AR, you’re screwed as DMR is a strictly better weapon. You can always choose the AR, but the DMR will always be the wiser choice. Due to the nature of the sandbox, loadouts don’t work in Halo. Weapons are too different, each has their own niche, each is strictly better at something than the other or is inferior to all other weapons. Then there is the utility weapon that is the weapon you want to spawn with because it’s the only weapon that works cross-niche and therefore allows for faster and smoother combat flow and increases the amount of strategical choices for the player.

On the other hand, I see nothing wrong with spawning with an AR if it’s an option. After all, it’s the player’s choice do they want to spawn with an inferior weapon. But in reality, due to the nature of the sandbox, implementation of loadouts isn’t a wise thing to do, they simply won’t provide their full potential depth or even come close to that as they are fundamentally different from the general gameplay style of Halo.

> > 1-You practically say “Oh yoink you 343, let us make the game” in a “polite” way.
> >
> > 2- There are just 109 active people on this forum( And not EVERY one hates change)
> >
> > 3-The game is going to sell a lot of copies and most folks are going to like it (Those “Casuals” are fans just like you, that should be considered just like you).
> >
> > Note: If you really despise change that much, just keep playing Halo 3 forever and let the rest of us Enjoy Halo.
> >
> > Excuse my Grammar(English is not my native lenguaje)
>
> I understand that there are alot more casual players than competitive players, but should the competitive players be ignored?
>
> I play everyday for great periods at a time, and I have been playing since Halo 2. I am a tremendous fan of the Halo franchise, and I have all the faith in the worl that 343 will hopefully make a great game, and not another horrible version of Halo: rEach.
>
> But for you to sit here and say that they should just disregard the competitive, and more dedicated community is one of the most ignorant, stupid, and selfish things to date.
>
> People like you as a conglomerate are why games can take a turn for the worst, and change is a good thing but for love of god do you want to play Halo or a version of COD in space?
>
> Halo 2, and Halo 3 are p[rime examples of a good Halo game. Halo: Reach is a prime example of change can take a huge turn for the worst, and is a big indicator of what direction not to go in.
>
> So please learn a little bit, and be open minded before you post random BS.

It has happend to me more than once, the most recent example is Gears Of War, i hated what i loved to change, but i learned to accept it.

In my opinion you are the ones who should open mind and learn to accept change, after all, if you want to go nostalgic, Halo 3 is there.

Nostalgia is beautiful, not only in video games, but in life.

The problem is when it controls your tastes and feelments, so when somethings changes, you don´t enjoy it, so it´s ok to preffer “Good o´l times”, but is wrong not to learn to enjoy different things.

I know this isn´t the place for life lessons, but i think it´s the best way to express my point.

But why should I just go back to Halo 3? WHy can’t we sticvk to what works, and only make the necessary changes to halo 4? Why does it have to be sp drastically different?

I mean honestly do you not see what happened with Reach? Would you just have a completely different game altogether, one that pertains more to COD than halo? Like honestly not all change is good that is a fact.

Halo 4 will be fine

And if not lets hope 343I does a good TU but im more hopping that H4 will not need a TU

> Halo 4 will be fine
>
>
>
> And if not lets hope 343I does a good TU but im more hopping that H4 will not need a TU

Yeah because it did wonders for Reach… NOT!

fluffy you are a rere.

Also if they dont bring back jetpack and/or swordbase for H4, Imma be very angry

> > Halo 4 will be fine
> >
> >
> >
> > And if not lets hope 343I does a good TU but im more hopping that H4 will not need a TU
>
> Yeah because it did wonders for Reach… NOT!

THE TU Did Make it a lot better BUT still not a great game !
Halo 4 starts out better then reach a TU can only make it better Right ??

All in all only time will tell