I have a theory. It is a layman’s one, but I’d like to ask the community.
Obviously, a game must evolve. If Halo would just stay the same, obviously there would be just as many complaints.
In order to have a game’s multiplayer experience evolve, what can be changed?
- Maps
- Graphics
- Weapons
- New player features (sprint, load outs, etc.)
My focus for this post is #3.
In Halo and Halo 2 there was not a whole lots of weapon overlap. That is, there were not many weapons that served essentially the same purpose but just had a few minor tweaks.
Example:
DMR vs. BR
Alien Sniper vs. Human Sniper
BR vs. Carbine vs. ~DMR
In the first couple of Halo games, there was not nearly the amount of overlap. 3 guns did not serve the same purpose at relatively the same range. Because of this, balancing issues were not as intricate. A shotgun or sword would be king at short range, a BR at medium range, a rocket for many situations, and a Sniper at long range. With only a certain amount of weapons on the map, you did not risk running into (very often, exceptions exist) 3 shotguns, 3 rockets, 4 saws, etc. The goal of the game was for you and your team to control the weapons you had on the map you were on by utilizing player skill and advantageous situations to win a game.
With the new system, 3 people may not have shotguns, but 3 people could have shotgun-esque weapons. With this, Halo has now become less about weapon control and more about map control. Not that map control is a bad thing, but it seems as if Halo Reach and Halo 4 have taken an element from past games out to encourage and emphasize another.
I for one, am not too fond of it.
Thoughts?
Tripod