Im going to give you a simple solution 343

Lots of times, people over-complicate things such as attracting casual or competitive gamers when all anyone really wants is a Halo game that is a simple and sound shooter.

Look at the perceived “Best shooters” by the veteran shooter community. They did NOT have all these gimmicks modern day shooters have. It was move,shoot,choose you’re gun/pick-up the weapon you want to use. There wasn’t gimmicks like Armor lock or Kill-streaks that really dont make any sense from a game play perspective. It was you shoot more accurately I die, I shoot you more accurately I die. That is many times the result of encounters in shooter games.

Sure, you have exceptions like Shadowrun but a shooter is clean,simple fun its a pure form of gaming that anyone can really learn. The complications like strategy,set-ups, positioning, tactics are many times created by the players. The game should not try to create these complications for the players, this many times ends up instead being frustrating to the players such as DMR reticle bloom was to most players.

If I gave two noobs a controller and a copy of Halo 1 and told them to play, not knowing the “Best tactics and strategy” it would look like a mess to most veteran players right? But those new players would still be able to shoot,move,and use tactics they would be playing the same game as I would but in a much simplified way. The point is, a shooter is still a simple and clean experience valuing skill above all else, the other stuff is but fluff.

Most players do not play a particular shooter because it has “Kill-streaks” “Jetpacks”, or any particular feature. The average shooter fan likes that particular shooter because it moves,shoots, and looks good. Its not that complicated to see why Halo,CoD, CS, BF, ect… are popular its because the core game mechanics shine above all the other features. The simple acts of shooting,moving, and being able to locate an opponent are simply better than most other shooters. Its not a RPG where the games are judged more off of content and class dynamics, shooters are judged off feel of the core game mechanics above all else. and Halo as without a doubt deteriorated in the core game mechanics of moving,shooting, and clean gameplay over the years.

Mechanics like strafe acceleration/aim acceleration feels horrid in H3+Reach. I feel like I have to “start and stop” many times in H3 to get an accurate head-shot because my reticle starts to speed up beyond my control. The same is true with movement, its sluggish and non-responsive due to strafe acceleration. This is a HUGE downgrade from the core mechanics of Halo 1+2 where I felt in control of my Master Chief. Go watch any H1+H2 video compared to a Halo 3+Reach video and ask you’re self which game would you want to play judging by core game mechanics? If you say Halo 3 or Reach you are in the minority of shooter fans, most would without a doubt say the first two Halo games excelled in core shooter mechanics.

Now lets look at gimmicks. First watch any Halo trilogy gameplay and notice how the game-play flows smoothly, there is not much in those Halo games that make you say “WTF that is really random/cheap” because they were clean,simple,shooters. The kind of shooters that excel at the core game mechanics and allow players to create the complications. Anyone can play these shooters casual or competitive and be playing close to the same game and enjoy their experience.

Now lets look at Halo Reach gameplay. We have people flying around in jet packs on soft kill zones shooting people from “god positions”. We have people pausing the game using Armor lock making players feel cheated of their kills. We have people spamming camo jamming their teammates radars, and abusing the AA to camo snipe and camp in corners. We even have a gameplay mechanics breaking the number 1 rule of any shooter “I shoot you more accurately than you do me you die” a by product of random reticle bloom.

Now lets get two random Halo noobs off the street and ask them what game they would rather play? I promise you the majority of the time those new players are picking the shooters with better core shooter mechanics, and logical non-gimmicky game-play.

TLDR: The Halo trilogy games are the clear winners in having superior core shooter mechanics, and providing gameplay that casuals+competitive players can enjoy. The gameplay complications are provided by the players, not the game unlike the polarizing Halo Reach game. So then why build off the inferior shooter game? Why build off a polarizing and gimmicky Halo experience, rather than a clean,simple, and uniting Halo game that every shooter fan can enjoy? By adding more gimmicks on top of the returning Reach gimmicks, 343 is simply polarizing the shooter fan base further and limiting the games appeal to the Reach fanbase that enjoys these features. By doing this 343 is alienating the core shooter fan, in favor of the casual shooter fan instead of providing a simple,clean, and fun shooter everyone can enjoy and play at a basic level.

Halo is practically the embodiment of a simple,clean, and fun shooter. Reach changed that and people wonder why Halo’s popularity as a multiplayer shooter has declined? 343 you need to go back to the basics with Halo 4, not build off an inferior and less appealing shooter game in Halo Reach. The shooter fanbase will thank you and you will have a more wide-spread appeal with Halo 4.

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

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

inb4 chinacalled

Compliment removed.

> Lol. “Simple Solution” followed by a dissertation.
>
> Now I’ll read your essay.

Just Read the last paragraph, if you’re attention span is incapable of handling a 45 second read.

Halo CE is the best. Halo 2 was garbage only saved by button combos. =P

Joking aside, i would love the fast kill times, back (reasonably fast, not 3 shot kill/BXR fast), moon jumps, and strafes to come back. I don’t care what Halo 4 or Halo 117 is modeled after, as long as it has those 3 things i am happy.

Though for once, i would like to have a Halo game that revolved around more than utility. Loved the weapons to death but the sandbox is too big now, it worked for CE but not future titles. You can call me wrong but the current Halo sandboxes are garbage with most weapons falling to BR/DMR and thus just take up space and inevitably get removed by MLG. Rather have more resources devoted to something else if we are going to continue this trend of implementing garbage weapons.

I can argue that while 343 may seem like they are building off Reach (they are really), Bungie implemented the ideas horribly in that game. No one considers the possibility that they may succeed where Bungie derped but too quickly embrace the notion that Halo 4 is instant trash based off an incomplete build and 10 seconds worth of footage.

The reasoning behind these changes/gimmicks is that Halo needs to change and 343 is reflecting that with Halo 4. If Halo remains at trying to recapture the spirit of CE/2 and failing (Halo 3/Reach), it’s just going to be stuck in a hole, disappoint nostalgic veterans, and die due a lack of innovation. That’s why 343 is doing this with Halo 4; to introduce the change the franchise needs. Regardless of what anyone says, the core shooter fan IS the casual now. Any sane developer will do their best to cater to both majority (casual) and minority (veterans/competitive players) and i hope 343 does this well.

Good read even though some points i agree and others i do not. I actually read the wall and i am baffled to why you dumbed down your post with a TL;DR. Totally unnecessary as it doesn’t take long to read that at all.

Halo 4 can go either way from me, i am just not as cynical i suppose. Still, i am worried about the new changes and excited at the same time. Catering to both sides is the way to go, not derpy 99 percent casual playlists and 1 failed ranked or vice versa.

> Lol. “Simple Solution” followed by a dissertation.
>
> Now I’ll read your essay.

The solution, in itself, is very simple. But like any good proposition, it had a lot of reasoning to back it up. And I agree with it, the end experience won’t get any better and the game won’t get any more longetitive regardless of how many gameplay mechanics and gimmicks the developer is adding. In fact, doing such a thing will do quite the opposite as it is doing in this case. Halo would be much better if, instead of relying on constant stream of new gimmicks, it would concentrate on the core of what makes it good and only add things that actually support the gameplay. Very much like DesktopBarrel said.

Good lord people. I opened the thread. Made the joke. Read the OP. enjoyed it. And everyone gets defensive.

I will make an even simpler statement.

If you don’t like what you are seen, the signout button is up there ^

Get use to the dumbing down of games. The industry changed this gen. It’s only going to go downhill for gamers until the industry crashes again…

> The reasoning behind these changes/gimmicks is that Halo needs to change and 343 is reflecting that with Halo 4. If Halo remains at trying to recapture the spirit of CE/2 and failing (Halo 3/Reach), it’s just going to be stuck in a hole, disappoint nostalgic veterans, and die due a lack of innovation. That’s why 343 is doing this with Halo 4; to introduce the change the franchise needs.

Even this question does Halo really need to change is debatable. After all, good games generally don’t change but reinforce their core. That’s the reason we have games such as chess that go through very little changes in decades. After all, when you come up with a good formula or a set of rules, you don’t want to just throw it away after a few years.

If there is a reason for why Halo seems to be getting stale, it’s not that it’s not changing, but that it’s changing in the wrong places. Every gimmick added to it only erodes its life as all the gimmicks very much go against the core mechanics of what makes Halo work in the first place.

I am not saying Halo can’t or shouldn’t change, but a matter of fact is that it’s changing in the wrong way. CE had a lot of phenomenal features that furher got removed or degraded to be insignificant, one of them being nading of weapons and power-ups, and more recently, the whole concept of power-ups in general. These were concepts that were part of Halo, part of what made it such a good game.

It’s certainly not too late for Halo to take a better direction of change, one that doesn’t disregard old gameplay mechanics and replace them with gimmicks in hopes of being more “modern” by doing what everyone else is doing. Because really, that’s all the gaming industry is today, do what the most popular game is doing. Taking features from other games that clearly aren’t intended for your game and trying to get them work can hardly be called innovation. In that sense, I agree with you that Halo needs innovation, but 343i doesn’t seem to know the right way to do it.

None of the gameplay changes introduced this far are something I would consider the franchise to need, no. They seem more like mechanics the developer implements desperately in hopes of getting something new into the game without even a thought given to the fact that maybe it’s not the kind of change the game needs.

It’s not necessarily that Halo should stick to exactly what made Halo CE and 2 work, but those are two games that are certainly worth of looking at when designing gameplay. After all, they had that fluidity and simplicity a well designed shooter needs. Additions can very well be made, but they don’t need to contradict with the existing model of gameplay. There is no law stopping you from improving the existing gameplay and forcing you to invent a completely new style of gameplay.

> Lots of times, people over-complicate things such as attracting casual or competitive gamers when all anyone really wants is a Halo game that is a simple and sound shooter.
>
> Look at the perceived “Best shooters” by the veteran shooter community. They did NOT have all these gimmicks modern day shooters have. It was move,shoot,choose you’re gun/pick-up the weapon you want to use. There wasn’t gimmicks like Armor lock or Kill-streaks that really dont make any sense from a game play perspective. <mark>It was you shoot more accurately I die, I shoot you more accurately I die.</mark> That is many times the result of encounters in shooter games.
>
> Sure, you have exceptions like Shadowrun but a shooter is clean,simple fun its a pure form of gaming that anyone can really learn. The complications like strategy,set-ups, positioning, tactics are many times created by the players. The game should not try to create these complications for the players, this many times ends up instead being frustrating to the players such as DMR reticle bloom was to most players.
>
> If I gave two noobs a controller and a copy of Halo 1 and told them to play, not knowing the “Best tactics and strategy” it would look like a mess to most veteran players right? But those new players would still be able to shoot,move,and use tactics they would be playing the same game as I would but in a much simplified way. The point is, a shooter is still a simple and clean experience valuing skill above all else, the other stuff is but fluff.
>
> Most players do not play a particular shooter because it has “Kill-streaks” “Jetpacks”, or any particular feature. The average shooter fan likes that particular shooter because it moves,shoots, and looks good. Its not that complicated to see why Halo,CoD, CS, BF, ect… are popular its because the core game mechanics shine above all the other features. The simple acts of shooting,moving, and being able to locate an opponent are simply better than most other shooters. Its not a RPG where the games are judged more off of content and class dynamics, shooters are judged off feel of the core game mechanics above all else. and Halo as without a doubt deteriorated in the core game mechanics of moving,shooting, and clean gameplay over the years.
>
> Mechanics like strafe acceleration/aim acceleration feels horrid in H3+Reach. I feel like I have to “start and stop” many times in H3 to get an accurate head-shot because my reticle starts to speed up beyond my control. The same is true with movement, its sluggish and non-responsive due to strafe acceleration. This is a HUGE downgrade from the core mechanics of Halo 1+2 where I felt in control of my Master Chief. Go watch any H1+H2 video compared to a Halo 3+Reach video and ask you’re self which game would you want to play judging by core game mechanics? If you say Halo 3 or Reach you are in the minority of shooter fans, most would without a doubt say the first two Halo games excelled in core shooter mechanics.
>
> Now lets look at gimmicks. First watch any Halo trilogy gameplay and notice how the game-play flows smoothly, there is not much in those Halo games that make you say “WTF that is really random/cheap” because they were clean,simple,shooters. The kind of shooters that excel at the core game mechanics and allow players to create the complications. Anyone can play these shooters casual or competitive and be playing close to the same game and enjoy their experience.
>
> Now lets look at Halo Reach gameplay. We have people flying around in jet packs on soft kill zones shooting people from “god positions”. We have people pausing the game using Armor lock making players feel cheated of their kills. We have people spamming camo jamming their teammates radars, and abusing the AA to camo snipe and camp in corners. We even have a gameplay mechanics breaking the number 1 rule of any shooter “I shoot you more accurately than you do me you die” a by product of random reticle bloom.
>
> Now lets get two random Halo noobs off the street and ask them what game they would rather play? I promise you the majority of the time those new players are picking the shooters with better core shooter mechanics, and logical non-gimmicky game-play.
>
> TLDR: The Halo trilogy games are the clear winners in having superior core shooter mechanics, and providing gameplay that casuals+competitive players can enjoy. The gameplay complications are provided by the players, not the game unlike the polarizing Halo Reach game. So then why build off the inferior shooter game? Why build off a polarizing and gimmicky Halo experience, rather than a clean,simple, and uniting Halo game that every shooter fan can enjoy? By adding more gimmicks on top of the returning Reach gimmicks, 343 is simply polarizing the shooter fan base further and limiting the games appeal to the Reach fanbase that enjoys these features. By doing this 343 is alienating the core shooter fan, in favor of the casual shooter fan instead of providing a simple,clean, and fun shooter everyone can enjoy and play at a basic level.
>
> Halo is practically the embodiment of a simple,clean, and fun shooter. Reach changed that and people wonder why Halo’s popularity as a multiplayer shooter has declined? 343 you need to go back to the basics with Halo 4, not build off an inferior and less appealing shooter game in Halo Reach. The shooter fanbase will thank you and you will have a more wide-spread appeal with Halo 4.

NO! how long have you been playing Shooters?

Your TL;DR needs a TL;DR.

Pelicans and Elephants are all I want.

> > Lol. “Simple Solution” followed by a dissertation.
> >
> > Now I’ll read your essay.
>
> Just Read the last paragraph, if you’re attention span is incapable of handling a 45 second read.

Keep it Pithy

> Halo CE is the best. Halo 2 was garbage only saved by button combos. =P

Yes, without a doubt the best when it comes to core shooter mechanics. Halo 1 was without a doubt, fun for ANY player who played it because of the excellent core of the game. The Halo Anniversary game re-confirmed this for me, even though it was just campaign I felt like I was playing a superb shooter just because it operated well at a basic level. Much better than the current Halo game I was playing, Halo Reach that is for sure. Halo 2 was great as well, I never once questioned the movement or aiming aspect of those games or felt frustration because of game mechanics. Hit-boxes in H2 yes, glitches at times, but those games had the marks of great shooters that anyone casual or competitive could enjoy without the “customization” we have today.

> Joking aside, i would love the fast kill times, back (reasonably fast, not 3 shot kill/BXR fast), moon jumps, and strafes to come back. I don’t care what Halo 4 or Halo 117 is modeled after, as long as it has those 3 things i am happy.

Agreed, kill times I would prefer closer to Halo 2 as I felt the Individual skill/Teammwork dynamic in that Halo game was perfect. But the point is the movement,aiming, and casual+ competitive appeal of those Halo games are superior to their successors and why anyone would want to build off an inferior core shooter model is beyond me.

> Though for once, i would like to have a Halo game that revolved around more than utility. Loved the weapons to death but the sandbox is too big now, it worked for CE but not future titles. You can call me wrong but the current Halo sandboxes are garbage with most weapons falling to BR/DMR and thus just take up space and inevitably get removed by MLG. Rather have more resources devoted to something else if we are going to continue this trend of implementing garbage weapons.

Agreed, another thing Halo 1 excelled at weapon balance across the board for all players. The number 1 problem with Halo’s Sandbox in recent years is niche weapons like the plasma rifle and AR, are not viable. Nerfing and randomizing the precision weapons is not the solution, the solution is buffing the niche weapons and giving them unique properties(IE:Plasma Rifle plasma freeze) that encourage their use while differentiating the alien weapons from the human weapons.

> I can argue that while 343 may seem like they are building off Reach (they are really), Bungie implemented the ideas horribly in that game. No one considers the possibility that they may succeed where Bungie derped but too quickly embrace the notion that Halo 4 is instant trash based off an incomplete build and 10 seconds worth of footage.

I dont question that they have improved returning game mechanics, I question how building of an inferior shooter model that has shown to be polarizing and not in the interest of all communities is in the best interest for the future of Halo. Anyone who has played all Halo games, knows that as the game has become more gimmicky with each release, the divide of the player-base has grown and the enjoyment of the game has deteriorated. Why build off a factually less balanced, more polarizing shooter when you have the opportunity to build off superior FPS, and innovate to fit within the model of what works. Ill give you a hint, what works is simple,clean,non-gimmick Halo. The more gimmicks the more Halo will deteriate as a shooter.

> The reasoning behind these changes/gimmicks is that Halo needs to change and 343 is reflecting that with Halo 4. If Halo remains at trying to recapture the spirit of CE/2 and failing (Halo 3/Reach), it’s just going to be stuck in a hole, disappoint nostalgic veterans, and die due a lack of innovation. That’s why 343 is doing this with Halo 4; to introduce the change the franchise needs. Regardless of what anyone says, the core shooter fan IS the casual now. Any sane developer will do their best to cater to both majority (casual) and minority (veterans/competitive players) and i hope 343 does this well.

This is where I disagree, the core shooter fanbase is still the same. The core shooter fanbase likes simple,clean, and logical shooters anyone can enjoy at a basic level. Halo 1/2/3 fill the needs of the average shooter fan better than that of Halo Reach. That is why they are superior core shooters. The franchise was breaking records before Halo Reach was released, as more gimmicks were added the multiplayer population has become split and more problems have arisen. The solution is not add more -Yoink- in hope of people being amazed at all the new content, the solution is to build a simple,clean,and logical shooter that casual+ competitive players can enjoy. Innovation should come in areas, other than gimmicks. Gimmicks are but fluff, the majority of the attention needs to be put on the basics of building a sound shooter. I perceive most of the “innovation” coming in H4 as “Here guys, heres some more useless game-breaking gimmicks like Promethean vision to further split the community” again in no way does this improve game-play or anyone’s excitement for Halo 4.

> Good read even though some points i agree and others i do not. I actually read the wall and i am baffled to why you dumbed down your post with a TL;DR. Totally unnecessary as it doesn’t take long to read that at all.
>
> Halo 4 can go either way from me, i am just not as cynical i suppose. Still, i am worried about the new changes and excited at the same time. Catering to both sides is the way to go, not derpy 99 percent casual playlists and 1 failed ranked or vice versa.

Exactly, targeting one group will only leave you with that group playing you’re game. Focusing on core shooter mechanics, and making sure gameplay shines above all else will get you the Halo trilogy’s level of success and appeal.

I keep on hearing 343 saying they want to “make it accessible for new players” by basically dumbing it down for them (ie: power weapon system). Well, dont be surprised if you only get new players playing the game and divide the community further to where the veteran player-base quickly dissipates as what happened with Reach.

TLDR: The Halo trilogy games are the clear winners in having superior core shooter mechanics, and providing gameplay that casuals+competitive players can enjoy. The gameplay complications are provided by the players, not the game unlike the polarizing Halo Reach game. So then why build off the inferior shooter game? Why build off a polarizing and gimmicky Halo experience, rather than a clean,simple, and uniting Halo game that every shooter fan can enjoy? By adding more gimmicks on top of the returning Reach gimmicks, 343 is simply polarizing the shooter fan base further and limiting the games appeal to the Reach fanbase that enjoys these features. By doing this 343 is alienating the core shooter fan, in favor of the casual shooter fan instead of providing a simple,clean, and fun shooter everyone can enjoy and play at a basic level

You guys are missing the point. WE, us, look at me, look at the person next to you, look at the guy three threads away. You see him, his names Chris, what an -Yoink- right? We are the reason Halo has had to change.

We are this “hard core” fan base, right and what have we really done for Halo? Look at some of the COD guys over at machinima, they are making 6 figures off of add revenue and Halo created machinima. COD just blew up and took that spot-lite, and since then Halo has had just this huge decline. We need people to be creating content, and not just content, but quality content. It was up to us to keep Halo relevant and we dropped the ball, we just assumed that it would remain the king forever, well its not.

343 and Microsoft have to take a step back, and take a long hard look at Halo and try to figure out how its going to take back that audience it lost, and how its going to keep halo relevant. They realized that lost there audience to Call of Duty because at the end of the day Call of Duty is a faster game, and most of the ADD/ADHD gamers gravitate towards and experience that is quicker. So when Microsoft and 343 got together their mentality, just from a business side has to be we’ve gotta win this audience back. On top of that look at some of the mechanics.

Sprint: Look love it or hate it sprint is hear to stay. It doesn’t necessarily make the game ‘faster’, that’s nothing just upping the base speed couldn’t fix. HOWEVER it’s the animation, it’s the I DID THAT, it’s the feel. That is what appeals to the ADD/ADHD gamer. The reality doesn’t matter.

AA’s: People like an edge, NOT EVERYONE is good at Halo. Halo has some of the hardest entry level gameplay, it’s just fact. Recharging shields, a game that’s based more on movement that shooting, shooting that can boil down to a mathematical certainty. People are harder to kill in Halo, its just fact. COD a few shots and it can make the worst Halo player feel like a God, its that satisfying feeling of getting kills even if you suck, you feel like you did something. AA’s help with that giving the player an advantage, they didn’t necessarily earn.

Load outs: People like to customize there game. People like to start with the weapons they believe they are good with. People like to tinker and spend hours creating load outs and testing them. In Halo 4 you’re also forced to earn your load out, and equipment. That adds an “Oh a piece of candy.” aspect to the game. People like being rewarded, they as like the illusion that if they get one more level or one more rank, they will be get that ‘thing’ that will change their game. Or if not this level the next, they continue to play, they bug their friends to play so they can unlock these items. Their friends buy the game and it perpetuated the cycle. Trust me I work in a Game Store, you have no IDEA how often I get people who drag their friends in to my store to by the exact same game they just bought a week ago, because they need a teammate to play with. And if I’m 343 I’m looking at that, and thinking I want people to do that with our game.

The so called “Pro” competitive community hasn’t helped the case ether. A lot of the “Pro” Call of Duty players started on Halo, and went over to Call of Duty as casuals. Then worked their way up to being “Pro” again, through Online tournaments. The Halo “Pro”/competitive community has this attitude that if its not LAN is not worth their time. And it shows in the fact that there is no real online tournaments for Halo there is no real way for average Joe to break into the competitive community. Of course MLG Halo just got a spoon full of pride to swallow when they were kicked from the Spring to a Game Battles latter, and I’m looking at a lot of ‘Pro’ players saying “No” to this, and retiring till Halo 4. And a huge part of why Reach failed, is yeah it was a garbage game, but, what happens when you -Yoink- about a game? What happens when the Pro’s trash the game? The general population takes that serous, how often do we trash talk Halo:Reach, but still put in a few games every night? Halo players have always been babied by MLG, and look at were its got then them. MLG dropped it and it has nothing to fall back on except for hoping that the Developers bring it back to its former glory, you cant be in that position. Halo needed to keep itself relevant with content between MLG events and it didn’t, and it allowed Call of Duty to over take it, and now it’s gotta take elements form other games in-order to evolve and create something new.

And I think if Halo 4 is going to work on any level we cant expect it to be Halo 2 or Halo 3. Its not going to happen, we will not get Halo 2 again. However don’t -Yoink- on what could potentially be a better experience, because its not Halo 2. And people I can’t be the only one who thinks these things.

> We are this “hard core” fan base, right and what have we really done for Halo? Look at some of the COD guys over at machinima, they are making 6 figures off of add revenue and Halo created machinima. COD just blew up and took that spot-lite, and since then Halo has had just this huge decline. We need people to be creating content, and not just content, but quality content. It was up to us to keep Halo relevant and we dropped the ball, we just assumed that it would remain the king forever, well its not.

I would of hoped to for once keep CoD of this discussion as I do not see it as a major reason for Halo’s multiplayer decline, I see it as a case of self-inflicted damage rather than outside forces sabotaging it. To humor you however, there is no doubt Halo’s community does more for its game than the CoD community does. We have countless machinima ,MLG, Red Versus Blue, montages, THC, BTB.net, Multiple forums, User created content created by the Forge community that gets implemented into the actual game, we even have a Halo PC mod community creating mods like This . Maybe the passion for the franchise is not as high as it was back in the day, but that is natural of all franchises that have existed as long as Halo.

> 343 and Microsoft have to take a step back, and take a long hard look at Halo and try to figure out how its going to take back that audience it lost, and how its going to keep halo relevant. They realized that lost there audience to Call of Duty because at the end of the day Call of Duty is a faster game, and most of the ADD/ADHD gamers gravitate towards and experience that is quicker. So when Microsoft and 343 got together their mentality, just from a business side has to be we’ve gotta win this audience back. On top of that look at some of the mechanics.

Halo spawned its own core fanbase made up of the first gen Xbox fanbase/early console fan-base and early 2nd Gen Xbox players. CoD currently owns the majority of the 2nd generation Xbox fan-base and probably always will just like Halo owns the first generation. When the third-gen Xbox’s come out, it will be a FFA once again as a new influx of players will inevitably be starting with their first Xbox.

Halo Reach was responsible for capturing the 2nd generation Xbox gamers and it failed in comparison MAINLY due to poor core shooter mechanics and increasing divide of the fanbase, therefore CoD suddenly had a huge influx in its population. Sure its not that black and white, but judging by population patterns this is close to what occurred. As for faster games being more popular that is not as important as some make it out.

CoD isnt even a fast-paced game compared to some PC titles, you still have alot of people camping back with sniper or camping in chokepoints. Again, I dont think it is the decreasing pace of Halo that really hurt it in the end, like I described in my post its the core shooter mechanics of Halo that have hurt it the most. Nobody likes reticle bloom or random battles, nobody likes sluggish movement, nobody likes OP nades, nobody likes gimmicks like AL except a minority of the shooter fanbase. These are the issues that need to be resolved first and foremost. Halo 4 can have twice the content and replayability of any other console FPS, but if the core shooting mechanics are inferior it will never be a more popular shooter.

TL;DR I want halo to live in 2007 forever.

> Look at the perceived “Best shooters” by the veteran shooter community.

Like which ones?

There usually some variance.

> Lots of times, people over-complicate things such as attracting casual or competitive gamers when all anyone really wants is a Halo game that is a simple and sound shooter.
>
> Look at the perceived “Best shooters” by the veteran shooter community. They did NOT have all these gimmicks modern day shooters have. It was move,shoot,choose you’re gun/pick-up the weapon you want to use. There wasn’t gimmicks like Armor lock or Kill-streaks that really dont make any sense from a game play perspective. It was you shoot more accurately I die, I shoot you more accurately I die. That is many times the result of encounters in shooter games.
>
> Sure, you have exceptions like Shadowrun but a shooter is clean,simple fun its a pure form of gaming that anyone can really learn. The complications like strategy,set-ups, positioning, tactics are many times created by the players. The game should not try to create these complications for the players, this many times ends up instead being frustrating to the players such as DMR reticle bloom was to most players.
>
> If I gave two noobs a controller and a copy of Halo 1 and told them to play, not knowing the “Best tactics and strategy” it would look like a mess to most veteran players right? But those new players would still be able to shoot,move,and use tactics they would be playing the same game as I would but in a much simplified way. The point is, a shooter is still a simple and clean experience valuing skill above all else, the other stuff is but fluff.
>
> Most players do not play a particular shooter because it has “Kill-streaks” “Jetpacks”, or any particular feature. The average shooter fan likes that particular shooter because it moves,shoots, and looks good. Its not that complicated to see why Halo,CoD, CS, BF, ect… are popular its because the core game mechanics shine above all the other features. The simple acts of shooting,moving, and being able to locate an opponent are simply better than most other shooters. Its not a RPG where the games are judged more off of content and class dynamics, shooters are judged off feel of the core game mechanics above all else. and Halo as without a doubt deteriorated in the core game mechanics of moving,shooting, and clean gameplay over the years.
>
> Mechanics like strafe acceleration/aim acceleration feels horrid in H3+Reach. I feel like I have to “start and stop” many times in H3 to get an accurate head-shot because my reticle starts to speed up beyond my control. The same is true with movement, its sluggish and non-responsive due to strafe acceleration. This is a HUGE downgrade from the core mechanics of Halo 1+2 where I felt in control of my Master Chief. Go watch any H1+H2 video compared to a Halo 3+Reach video and ask you’re self which game would you want to play judging by core game mechanics? If you say Halo 3 or Reach you are in the minority of shooter fans, most would without a doubt say the first two Halo games excelled in core shooter mechanics.
>
> Now lets look at gimmicks. First watch any Halo trilogy gameplay and notice how the game-play flows smoothly, there is not much in those Halo games that make you say “WTF that is really random/cheap” because they were clean,simple,shooters. The kind of shooters that excel at the core game mechanics and allow players to create the complications. Anyone can play these shooters casual or competitive and be playing close to the same game and enjoy their experience.
>
> Now lets look at Halo Reach gameplay. We have people flying around in jet packs on soft kill zones shooting people from “god positions”. We have people pausing the game using Armor lock making players feel cheated of their kills. We have people spamming camo jamming their teammates radars, and abusing the AA to camo snipe and camp in corners. We even have a gameplay mechanics breaking the number 1 rule of any shooter “I shoot you more accurately than you do me you die” a by product of random reticle bloom.
>
> Now lets get two random Halo noobs off the street and ask them what game they would rather play? I promise you the majority of the time those new players are picking the shooters with better core shooter mechanics, and logical non-gimmicky game-play.
>
> TLDR: The Halo trilogy games are the clear winners in having superior core shooter mechanics, and providing gameplay that casuals+competitive players can enjoy. The gameplay complications are provided by the players, not the game unlike the polarizing Halo Reach game. So then why build off the inferior shooter game? Why build off a polarizing and gimmicky Halo experience, rather than a clean,simple, and uniting Halo game that every shooter fan can enjoy? By adding more gimmicks on top of the returning Reach gimmicks, 343 is simply polarizing the shooter fan base further and limiting the games appeal to the Reach fanbase that enjoys these features. By doing this 343 is alienating the core shooter fan, in favor of the casual shooter fan instead of providing a simple,clean, and fun shooter everyone can enjoy and play at a basic level.
>
> Halo is practically the embodiment of a simple,clean, and fun shooter. Reach changed that and people wonder why Halo’s popularity as a multiplayer shooter has declined? 343 you need to go back to the basics with Halo 4, not build off an inferior and less appealing shooter game in Halo Reach. The shooter fanbase will thank you and you will have a more wide-spread appeal with Halo 4.

Agreed man i don’t know what 343 is doing adding all these random things to the game