I remember back in the day when Halo was very popular. But now, it seemed to have lost its place as being one of the top games for xbox, and facing so much negativity and criticism. Not sure if it has something to do with art style, gameplay machanics, or story direction or lore. But whatever the case may be, I can’t help but feel that Halo may have lost it touch. I know I’m probably speaking out of nostolgia here, but I think there’s something missing to that title. That special feeling that made Halo so great and memorable that it’s an icon.
I don’t think anyone’s going to really argue with you on that. Bungie’s Halo games were far from perfect, but I think it’s pretty clear Halo’s golden age has passed.
If you’re comparing the popularity of games across a span of time greater than a decade, you have to look at the varying factors, such as early Halo having next-to-no competition, where the current market is flooded with FPS and Third-person shooters. That alone will have an effect on how many people are playing this game at any given time. We don’t only play our top favorite games, so even if it could be objectively stated that Halo was the best, they’d still have reduced players due to people dabbling with the others at different times.
Pessimism won’t help the franchise. If improvements are needed, then we can participate in the forums talking about what changes we would prefer, as that would be constructive. Saying the franchise passed its hayday isn’t.
If popularity makes games great then I guess Destiny and BLOP3 are great games? No thanks. You can keep “greatness” if that’s how you want to define it.
You’re correct on all fronts in my opinion. There’s way more high quality competition today than there used to be and Halo at the moment just doesn’t have the draw that other shooters do. It seems it’s more for a niche audience rather than the general public that’s busy playing BF/CoD, etc.
I’m an old Halo CE fan that is just returning after many, many years. I have to say that I am very impressed with how deep Halo’s story is and for me that is what sets it apart from most other games. In the past I wasn’t as interested in the Halo story (though it was great) as I was in the game. Perhaps back then, the story was not as fleshed out or I just didn’t know about it.
On my recent return, though, I have jumped all in on the lore. I have a bunch of Halo books (the Halo Mythos book by 343 is fantastic and allowed someone like me to catch up quickly as I dig deeper into other materials) and can’t get enough. Even though I am still somewhat time constrained to be able to play often, I am still able to surround myself with Halo in one fashion or another.
My excitement for the Halo story may cloud my outlook on the games - but I am very excited to be back. I am just tired of GTA and COD games. This seems to have another dimension to me.
The fact that they have released Halo Wars DE, and with Halo Wars 2 right around the corner, has me excited even more. I have always liked strategy games and it is nice to have a different style of game that is also in the Halo universe. There are not many other game franchises that could pull a similar thing off.
Upon my return, I was also interested in Halo’s current popularity and was a little surprised to see how much it seemed to have slid. I can say one thing for sure, between buying all of the games (old and new) and many other related books and materials - I have recently dumped a lot of money into Halo lately, more money than any other game franchise - that is for sure.
Maybe its just my own personal excitement - but I have a feeling Halo is going to rise to the top again. There just seems to be so many facets to it. Between all the games (old and new, FPS and RTS), following the HCS, and diving into the lore - I can’t get enough. The only thing I am upset about, is that I didn’t return to Halo sooner!
Halo is now built to achieve the standards of a decade ago, which would have been fine in 2007, but it’s 2017. The standards for games has been lifted up a lot since then, people want more out of games now. That’s mostly why. Halo is boring compared to other shooters because the community wants it to fit only their expectation but while keeping gameplay within their comfort zone so they will have no learning curve from game to game. The community has this self proclaimed holy status that whatever they want is what’s best and that’s just not true. Halo interests no one outside of the already established community. The gameplay is unbalanced and the weapons just don’t make sense. Why does a pistol outrange and out damage an assault rifle? That makes no sense and that does effect people who are coming into the game. The Halo community will continue to complain about how unpopular Halo is but they’ll never put it together that they’re a large portion of what keeps it that way.
As far as I’m concerned 343 has completely missed the mark with every attempt. H4 borrowed major elements from other shooters to appeal to a broader audience while “Satisfying veteran players” and I’m sorry, but they didnt! The campaign was gripping and emotional bit the MP was complete trash.
I don’t even need to say anything about the MCC because, well, MCC
H5 brought faster fluid gameplay to Arena but that’s where the pros stop for me. The campaign was an absolute mess, the community is permanently split thanks to 343 and Warzone, REQs, armor, maps, UI, customization…I could continue to rip this game a new -Yoink- hole but I’m just wasting my breath (text).
343 had the foundation and blueprints to continue the legacy in a fashion that would compliment the franchise, but their “built from the ground up” approach has left a hole in the hearts of veteran players, like myself, that have played Halo twice as long as they have attempted to develop it.
TL,DR. “343s Halo” is not Halo. Not even close!! H5 Guardians is more deserving of an entirely new IP then it is the name Halo
Halo began to decline the moment the gameplay started to radically change and become more complex. This started when Bungie released Halo: Reach. Reach was a great game, sure, but it definitely started the decline of the franchise’s popularity by bringing in armor abilities. Then, when 343 took over, they decided not to roll back the mistakes that were made in Reach. They instead decided to double-down on them by expanding armor abilities into armor abilities + player perks. They decided to expand the sprint problem by giving sprint to everybody. And they decided to implement the whole Ordinance Drop thing. Halo 5 saw some steps in the right direction by removing loadouts and Ordinance. But we’re still stuck with sprinting(once again, 343 expanded on a problem instead of removing it since now we have unlimited sprint for everyone), hit markers, a bunch of zany abilities, and ADS mechanics.
Simple, yet deep, gameplay mechanics are what stick with players and keep them coming back. The original Halo trilogy was a master class in this. Ever since Reach, the series has been introducing complexity without adding enough depth to compensate. The most heinous example of this is clamber. Clamber offers absolutely zero depth to the gameplay because there is one situation where you can use it(when a ledge is too high), and in that situation, clambering is frequently your only viable option because of the nerfed jump height in Halo 5 compared to its predecessors.
> 2811398874529013;9:
> Halo began to decline the moment the gameplay started to radically change and become more complex. This started when Bungie released Halo: Reach. Reach was a great game, sure, but it definitely started the decline of the franchise’s popularity by bringing in armor abilities. Then, when 343 took over, they decided not to roll back the mistakes that were made in Reach. They instead decided to double-down on them by expanding armor abilities into armor abilities + player perks. They decided to expand the sprint problem by giving sprint to everybody. And they decided to implement the whole Ordinance Drop thing. Halo 5 saw some steps in the right direction by removing loadouts and Ordinance. But we’re still stuck with sprinting(once again, 343 expanded on a problem instead of removing it since now we have unlimited sprint for everyone), hit markers, a bunch of zany abilities, and ADS mechanics.
>
> Simple, yet deep, gameplay mechanics are what stick with players and keep them coming back. The original Halo trilogy was a master class in this. Ever since Reach, the series has been introducing complexity without adding enough depth to compensate. The most heinous example of this is clamber. Clamber offers absolutely zero depth to the gameplay because there is one situation where you can use it(when a ledge is too high), and in that situation, clambering is frequently your only viable option because of the nerfed jump height in Halo 5 compared to its predecessors.
So what do you think of switching seats in vehicles?
> 2811398874529013;9:
> Halo began to decline the moment the gameplay started to radically change and become more complex. This started when Bungie released Halo: Reach. Reach was a great game, sure, but it definitely started the decline of the franchise’s popularity by bringing in armor abilities. Then, when 343 took over, they decided not to roll back the mistakes that were made in Reach. They instead decided to double-down on them by expanding armor abilities into armor abilities + player perks. They decided to expand the sprint problem by giving sprint to everybody. And they decided to implement the whole Ordinance Drop thing. Halo 5 saw some steps in the right direction by removing loadouts and Ordinance. But we’re still stuck with sprinting(once again, 343 expanded on a problem instead of removing it since now we have unlimited sprint for everyone), hit markers, a bunch of zany abilities, and ADS mechanics.
>
> Simple, yet deep, gameplay mechanics are what stick with players and keep them coming back. The original Halo trilogy was a master class in this. Ever since Reach, the series has been introducing complexity without adding enough depth to compensate. The most heinous example of this is clamber. Clamber offers absolutely zero depth to the gameplay because there is one situation where you can use it(when a ledge is too high), and in that situation, clambering is frequently your only viable option because of the nerfed jump height in Halo 5 compared to its predecessors.
I’m pretty sure we’ll always disagree about the desirability of sprint, but on virtually every other point you’ve made you’re fully in alignment with The World According To Recon. I especially appreciate the call out on Bungie - I grow tired of people who revere everything they did when in fact they were the ones who jumped down the rabbit hole with Reach. In my humble opinion Reach is every bit as much a part of New Halo as anything 343 has created.
> 2811398874529013;9:
> Halo began to decline the moment the gameplay started to radically change and become more complex. This started when Bungie released Halo: Reach. Reach was a great game, sure, but it definitely started the decline of the franchise’s popularity by bringing in armor abilities. Then, when 343 took over, they decided not to roll back the mistakes that were made in Reach. They instead decided to double-down on them by expanding armor abilities into armor abilities + player perks. They decided to expand the sprint problem by giving sprint to everybody. And they decided to implement the whole Ordinance Drop thing. Halo 5 saw some steps in the right direction by removing loadouts and Ordinance. But we’re still stuck with sprinting(once again, 343 expanded on a problem instead of removing it since now we have unlimited sprint for everyone), hit markers, a bunch of zany abilities, and ADS mechanics.
>
> Simple, yet deep, gameplay mechanics are what stick with players and keep them coming back. The original Halo trilogy was a master class in this. Ever since Reach, the series has been introducing complexity without adding enough depth to compensate. The most heinous example of this is clamber. Clamber offers absolutely zero depth to the gameplay because there is one situation where you can use it(when a ledge is too high), and in that situation, clambering is frequently your only viable option because of the nerfed jump height in Halo 5 compared to its predecessors.
Sorry, but Reach did not begin the downfall. Reach is the only game anyone remembers outside of the community. The community just hates it because they couldn’t mindlessly pull the trigger on precisions.
> 2533274873843883;11:
> > 2811398874529013;9:
> > Halo began to decline the moment the gameplay started to radically change and become more complex. This started when Bungie released Halo: Reach. Reach was a great game, sure, but it definitely started the decline of the franchise’s popularity by bringing in armor abilities. Then, when 343 took over, they decided not to roll back the mistakes that were made in Reach. They instead decided to double-down on them by expanding armor abilities into armor abilities + player perks. They decided to expand the sprint problem by giving sprint to everybody. And they decided to implement the whole Ordinance Drop thing. Halo 5 saw some steps in the right direction by removing loadouts and Ordinance. But we’re still stuck with sprinting(once again, 343 expanded on a problem instead of removing it since now we have unlimited sprint for everyone), hit markers, a bunch of zany abilities, and ADS mechanics.
> >
> > Simple, yet deep, gameplay mechanics are what stick with players and keep them coming back. The original Halo trilogy was a master class in this. Ever since Reach, the series has been introducing complexity without adding enough depth to compensate. The most heinous example of this is clamber. Clamber offers absolutely zero depth to the gameplay because there is one situation where you can use it(when a ledge is too high), and in that situation, clambering is frequently your only viable option because of the nerfed jump height in Halo 5 compared to its predecessors.
>
> I’m pretty sure we’ll always disagree about the desirability of sprint, but on virtually every other point you’ve made you’re fully in alignment with The World According To Recon. I especially appreciate the call out on Bungie - I grow tired of people who revere everything they did when in fact they were the ones who jumped down the rabbit hole with Reach. In my humble opinion Reach is every bit as much a part of New Halo as anything 343 has created.
I have said in numerous posts that Bungie is most definitely at fault for creating the split in Halos community with Reach. But compared to the atrocities made by 343 I’d still give Bungie a pass. The big difference between them is 343 had the benefit of knowing the damage caused by Reach and instead of correcting it, they intensified it, and still do. I can tolerate the gameplay in H5 but everything else about it makes me cringe. I have tried hard to love “343s Halo” but it’s night and day different from what it used to be, and I personally don’t think that’s a good thing at all
Yah, I’ve been feeling the same way, ever since 343 took over the campaign story has been really dull and generic. There is now tons of things people can pay for, heck there’s like 100 different gold pack things to purchase sometimes I wonder if I’m playing an mobile strategy game with the insane amount of purchases available.
> 2535442569875751;10:
> > 2811398874529013;9:
> > Halo began to decline the moment the gameplay started to radically change and become more complex. This started when Bungie released Halo: Reach. Reach was a great game, sure, but it definitely started the decline of the franchise’s popularity by bringing in armor abilities. Then, when 343 took over, they decided not to roll back the mistakes that were made in Reach. They instead decided to double-down on them by expanding armor abilities into armor abilities + player perks. They decided to expand the sprint problem by giving sprint to everybody. And they decided to implement the whole Ordinance Drop thing. Halo 5 saw some steps in the right direction by removing loadouts and Ordinance. But we’re still stuck with sprinting(once again, 343 expanded on a problem instead of removing it since now we have unlimited sprint for everyone), hit markers, a bunch of zany abilities, and ADS mechanics.
> >
> > Simple, yet deep, gameplay mechanics are what stick with players and keep them coming back. The original Halo trilogy was a master class in this. Ever since Reach, the series has been introducing complexity without adding enough depth to compensate. The most heinous example of this is clamber. Clamber offers absolutely zero depth to the gameplay because there is one situation where you can use it(when a ledge is too high), and in that situation, clambering is frequently your only viable option because of the nerfed jump height in Halo 5 compared to its predecessors.
>
> So what do you think of switching seats in vehicles?
I think that switching seats has such a small impact on the game that it really doesn’t do any harm and is therefore OK. Don’t get me wrong, seat switching also adds zero depth to the gameplay, but it’s not harmful either since nothing had to be nerfed or removed to include it. Seat switching is far more situational than clamber. You come across far more ledges that can’t be jumped to normally than you come across situations where you are in the wrong seat of a vehicle. Also, in those situations, the ability to get from one seat to another in a vehicle has far less of an impact on gameplay and gameplay strategies than clamber has.
> 2533274807278095;13:
> > 2533274873843883;11:
> > > 2811398874529013;9:
> > >
>
> I have said in numerous posts that Bungie is most definitely at fault for creating the split in Halos community with Reach. But compared to the atrocities made by 343 I’d still give Bungie a pass. The big difference between them is 343 had the benefit of knowing the damage caused by Reach and instead of correcting it, they intensified it, and still do. I can tolerate the gameplay in H5 but everything else about it makes me cringe. I have tried hard to love “343s Halo” but it’s night and day different from what it used to be, and I personally don’t think that’s a good thing at all
‘Atrocities’ is a strong word, although I imagine that Willko would use it too. I agree with the fact that Reach was the beginning of the rift, that Bungie is far from blameless, and that New Halo has flaws. But I guess that where I was headed, had I bothered to elaborate, is that I found Old Halo to be deeply flawed also, albeit in different ways. I also don’t believe that the split in Halo’s player base has, at the end of the day, anything to do with decisions made by either studio. I believe the player base split the game, not the other way around.
Halo cannot be all things to all people and, easy as it is for me to observe how it’s changed, I find it harder than you to deny the game the right to change. As much as I despise Halo 5 motion mechanics (something often discussed), and as much as I despise Halo 5 gun mechanics (something only I seem to have a problem with), I still can’t call this game illegitimate. It’s a serviceable vision of what Halo can be. Not the vision I had for it, but serviceable nonetheless. Is Halo under any obligation to please me just because I’m a CE veteran? Is Halo under any obligation to keep trying to re-create the unrecreatable success of Halo 3? Would I even want to see a return to any of the standards of that game, be they gameplay standards, story line, or sales success? I have an answer to that but I’ll leave it hanging in the air like a good rhetorical question should.
> 2535456575907503;2:
> I don’t think anyone’s going to really argue with you on that. Bungie’s Halo games were far from perfect, but I think it’s pretty clear Halo’s golden age has passed.
Bungies halos weren’t even good except campaign and reach the golden age was made when 343 took over, me when there was only halo 3 I would be playing call of duty when halo 5 came out i played it and am still playing it nonstop
> 2535415472426404;17:
> > 2535456575907503;2:
> > I don’t think anyone’s going to really argue with you on that. Bungie’s Halo games were far from perfect, but I think it’s pretty clear Halo’s golden age has passed.
>
> Bungies halos weren’t even good except campaign and reach the golden age was made when 343 took over, me when there was only halo 3 I would be playing call of duty when halo 5 came out i played it and am still playing it nonstop
I’m talking about numbers and popularity more than individual experiences. As a whole, Halo was infinitely more popular and commercially successful in the halo 2-3 era than any other.
> 2533274873843883;16:
> > 2533274807278095;13:
> > > 2533274873843883;11:
> > > > 2811398874529013;9:
> > > >
> >
> > I have said in numerous posts that Bungie is most definitely at fault for creating the split in Halos community with Reach. But compared to the atrocities made by 343 I’d still give Bungie a pass. The big difference between them is 343 had the benefit of knowing the damage caused by Reach and instead of correcting it, they intensified it, and still do. I can tolerate the gameplay in H5 but everything else about it makes me cringe. I have tried hard to love “343s Halo” but it’s night and day different from what it used to be, and I personally don’t think that’s a good thing at all
>
> ‘Atrocities’ is a strong word, although I imagine that Willko would use it too. I agree with the fact that Reach was the beginning of the rift, that Bungie is far from blameless, and that New Halo has flaws. But I guess that where I was headed, had I bothered to elaborate, is that I found Old Halo to be deeply flawed also, albeit in different ways. I also don’t believe that the split in Halo’s player base has, at the end of the day, anything to do with decisions made by either studio. I believe the player base split the game, not the other way around.
>
> Halo cannot be all things to all people and, easy as it is for me to observe how it’s changed, I find it harder than you to deny the game the right to change. As much as I despise Halo 5 motion mechanics (something often discussed), and as much as I despise Halo 5 gun mechanics (something only I seem to have a problem with), I still can’t call this game illegitimate. It’s a serviceable vision of what Halo can be. Not the vision I had for it, but serviceable nonetheless. Is Halo under any obligation to please me just because I’m a CE veteran? Is Halo under any obligation to keep trying to re-create the unrecreatable success of Halo 3? Would I even want to see a return to any of the standards of that game, be they gameplay standards, story line, or sales success? I have an answer to that but I’ll leave it hanging in the air like a good rhetorical question should.
I know Halo has affected tons of people and in equally different ways. For me personally it has been a part of my life for just over half of my life. Its no surprise how impactful it has been. I’m not denying Halo the ability or necessity to change, my issue is how it was done. Bungie tweeked the game from HCE up to the controversial Reach, but in all that time it always felt like Halo. There was no questioning it.
There’s a legitimate reason why the phrase “Call of Halo 4” came to be. It pretty much sums up exactly what H4s gameplay imitated and was. Virtually every single aspect of H5 has been changed to the point where the game feels completely alien. Without the inclusion of Spartans, Halos name on the box, or the weapons in game, Halo 5 could truly be its own IP. That’s how much different it is for me and I think the term “atrocity” is perfectly fitting and even tame depending on my mood.
No, Halo is not under any obligation to us, but why shouldn’t it be. Some of us have played the game twice as long as 343 has developed it. We are part of the reason the studio even exists. A smart business model would be to try and appeal to a wider audience, but not at the expense of Yoinking! on its existing clientele. No, I don’t want Halo 3.5, I want Halo to improve and grow. But I want Halo to look, play, feel and sound like Halo. I want it to be true to itself, not do -Yoink- other popular shooters are doin because it needs to do these things to stay relevant. To me that argument is garbage. Halo used to have a unique identify but that identify has been blurred and lost to its competition.
I can appreciate your perspective and I respect your opinion. Its great that post launch support is still goin a year later, but it still checks all the boxes except the ones that matter to me. The half finished game we got at launch still feels unfinished. The MCC was a train wreck 343 wishes we will forget. Their track record thus far is disappointing. As of right now I am unapologetically biased. H4 and H5 are always going to be the worst iterations of the franchise in my eyes (until H6 comes out) and I doubt anything they bring to the table will change that.
Times change new generation needs a new game… When Bungie left Halo faded into what it is now… and now it will never be the same even if Bungie kept making Halo because they have moved on