I've held back on saying this for a while,

Games Other Halo
#1

but I just can’t stand it anymore.

So, as most of you know, (As in, ALL of you.) Halo 4 is planned for launch next year. Now, it seems as if the community is attempting to shape Halo 4, without knowledge of anything relating to the game, aside from a teaser, concept art, and a sound design demonstration. Now, this may be considered good or bad, to each his own. blah, blah, blibbity blah.
Now, I shall get to my main point of this thread. While I’m sure 343i appreciates concerns of the community, I’m a bit concerned myself WITH the community, to be more exact, their image of a “Perfect Halo”.

I’m concerned, because I don’t want another Halo 3. DO NOT get me wrong, I loved that game with all my heart, and same with Halo 2, but the thing is, Halo 3 and Halo 2 feel a little…Too similar. I enjoyed Reach with the fact that it wasn’t just the same game. It had the Halo feel, but it wasn’t the same as the 2 games prior to it, which is good.

What I’m trying to say, is let Halo 4 be it’s own game. We DO NOT want another franchise like Call Of Duty, where each game is essentially the same, do we? Now, I know MANY people will disagree with me on this, and I know there are MAJOR differences between H2/H3, but, they just feel extremely similar to me. You don’t have to agree with me, and I never expect anyone to. So, Leave your thought below.

EDIT: Just for extra clarification, I DO NOT WANT:

Another Halo:Reach
Another Halo 3
Another Halo 2

#2

just tone down AA, no armor abilities and no bloom ill be a happy camper

#3

> just tone down AA, no armor abilities and no bloom ill be a happy camper

-looks at avatar-

#4

Honestly… to me H3 was Bungie’s TRUE “Swan Song”. They took H2’s Multiplayer (best MP of any Halo, even more then Reach) and made it probably THE most balanced MP we have still to this day. They basically got rid of the things that plagued Halo the most. (BXR, Super Jumps, etc.)

I know for a fact that after Halo 3 Bungie truthfully didn’t want to make Halo anymore, they were satisfied with the outcome of that game. Only reason they made ODST and Reach was because -Yoink!- forced them too for the monies. (They HAD to make 5 games due to their contract)

But I do completelyyyyy agree with you on the Community. They ARE trying to make the perfect Halo. Some of the arguments are valid… and GREAT ideas. But some of them are the stupidest crap I’ve read (and I lived on B.net since H2 released…).

Examples? Brink back the BR!, Bring back DUAL-Wielding…

Really? You CAN go play H3 to have BOTH of those you know? It’s still online… Reach isn’t the ONLY Halo you can play online still (R.I.P. Halo 2)

I want H4 to be a completely new and rejuvenating experience to a true Halo fanboy. I don’t want it to be H2/H3 either… but I ALSO don’t want it to be Reach’s inbred cousin. Reach is a great game… just Bungie chose to ignore it… and once they realized all the problems it was too late. -Yoink!- wouldn’t pay them to make the TU, or remotely even TOUCH the game. They were done… and they don’t belong to them anymore.

But that alone tarnished my thoughts on Bungie entirely and their future in the gaming buisness… if you didn’t care about YOUR last Halo, why should we care about your next GAME? Really?

And now 343i is going to take the fans voices and actually listen and shape Reach into (possibly) the BEST Halo in the series. Because like us, they’re fans at heart. <343i

#5

Ya I have to agree here, the Community always shapes every game into something it’s not before we get any info or a real confirmation. example(halo wars 2 threads all over, even though no game has even been spoken of) but there are always good ideas out there. I think the original 3 were the best games of all, best of luck to Halo 4,5,6!

Also Halo 2 superjumps were awesome when you got them off, lots of fun back in the day. Just part of the old game is all.

Lastly I hate armor abilities, felt like Bungie bent over for CoD players that wanted special abilities, can’t stand them honestly and hopefully won’t have to deal with them in Halo 4 but who knows…and only thing with Reach that was good truly was the campaign. Since the Campaign though is pretty much a side story along with the whole game it might as well be on the same page as ODST. It is what it is…

#6

> Honestly… to me H3 was Bungie’s TRUE “Swan Song”. They took H2’s Multiplayer (best MP of any Halo, even more then Reach) and made it probably THE most balanced MP we have still to this day. They basically got rid of the things that plagued Halo the most. (BXR, Super Jumps, etc.)
>
> I know for a fact that after Halo 3 Bungie truthfully didn’t want to make Halo anymore, they were satisfied with the outcome of that game. Only reason they made ODST and Reach was because -Yoink!- forced them too for the monies. (They HAD to make 5 games due to their contract)
>
> But I do completelyyyyy agree with you on the Community. They ARE trying to make the perfect Halo. Some of the arguments are valid… and GREAT ideas. But some of them are the stupidest crap I’ve read (and I lived on B.net since H2 released…).
>
> Examples? Brink back the BR!, Bring back DUAL-Wielding…
>
> Really? You CAN go play H3 to have BOTH of those you know? It’s still online… Reach isn’t the ONLY Halo you can play online still (R.I.P. Halo 2)
>
> I want H4 to be a completely new and rejuvenating experience to a true Halo fanboy. I don’t want it to be H2/H3 either… but I ALSO don’t want it to be Reach’s inbred cousin. Reach is a great game… just Bungie chose to ignore it… and once they realized all the problems it was too late. -Yoink!- wouldn’t pay them to make the TU, or remotely even TOUCH the game. They were done… and they don’t belong to them anymore.
>
> But that alone tarnished my thoughts on Bungie entirely and their future in the gaming buisness… if you didn’t care about YOUR last Halo, why should we care about your next GAME? Really?
>
> And now 343i is going to take the fans voices and actually listen and shape Reach into (possibly) the BEST Halo in the series. Because like us, they’re fans at heart. <343i

The stupid ideas are what worries me. THERE ARE SO MANY THREADS ABOUT THEM. Also, while I don’t think it should be too similar to reach, something like sprint, or evade might work, but definitely not ALL the AAs, (I’m just using examples here.) Or, just something that makes it both different, and better/equally good, as long as it works.

#7

The only thing that I hated about Halo Reach is that:

The game was built around armor abilites, both maps, explosive splash damage, jump height and player speed were built around armor abilties. I hope it comes back to the way it was in H3 where they were pick ups and their were no changes to the model of gameplay from its predecessor, Halo 2. This is my BIGGEST problem.

Vehicles were killed by snipers

Bloom… (cant wait for october 4th!) I don’t mind bloom, i sure as heck didn’t mind it when I couldn’t see it in Halo 1 on the pistol, and even on the pistol and carbine in halo 2 and 3. But it was upped a whole lot in Reach. in previous games you only shot slowly if you wanted to hit with precision (example: carbine, if you shot it rapidly it would be effective only at a medium to close range) (example 2: Halo 1 2 & 3 pistol their was barely any spread on the magnum ever, the only time the shots got out of control was if you were shooting them a long distance, in Reach i have to time my shots from a medium range!? Same with the DMR and NR. Don’t get me wrong though, bloom should stay on semi-automatic guns, it would’ve actually been helpful on a gun like the carbine, but the spread from rapid-fire needs to be massively toned down! lets hope 85% bloom is how much their was in Halo 1,2 & 3 because i agree we should innovate but they should never do bloom like they did in Reach ever again it was a messy situation

#8

You lost me once you said " I enjoy Reach…"

Halos’ community has dwindle in numbers due to the severity change made. While Bungie hoped to attract your casual gamers and add your typical "new to Halo" gamers, it failed dramatically in supporting your Loyal gamers. What set Halo apart from your other FPS games is that it was just your typical point and shoot concept. It was fun, competitive, and memorable for years to come.

Reach with it being out only a year has dropped the amount of Loyal gamers, and dropped in sales (maps purchased online) and other factors as well. Bungie pretty much handed 343i the game saying… "here could you fix this pile of cheeeeetos :wink: "

Reach would have not sold as well the first couple of weeks if it did not have the HALO title hanging over it. So I really hope it is like the other Halos’ 2/3, where your simple BR reflexes mattered, and true skills were born. Keep your pace bloom expansion theory for other FPS’ games. Halo is unique to us loyalist.

#9

apart from what I have just said above, yes they should innovate. Not by adding more bloom to guns, and building the game around a new “Armor Addon” or anything of that sort.

I’m all in for risks though, and i applaud bungie for taking this one with Reach. I hope that 343industries can learn from Halo Reach, as well as all the other Halos, and get inspiration from other games(keep it halo!) as well as the greatest innovative tool ever which is originality, to craft the ultimate halo 4 experience. If it fails, I will applaud them for trying, and they still have Halo 5 and 6 to take what they learned from Halo 4 to make the experience better.

Great Post.

#10

> You lost me once you said " I enjoy Reach…"
>
> Halos’ community has dwindle in numbers due to the severity change made. While Bungie hoped to attract your casual gamers and add your typical "new to Halo" gamers, it failed dramatically in supporting your Loyal gamers. What set Halo apart from your other FPS games is that it was just your typical point and shoot concept. It was fun, competitive, and memorable for years to come.
>
> Reach with it being out only a year has dropped the amount of Loyal gamers, and dropped in sales (maps purchased online) and other factors as well. Bungie pretty much handed 343i the game saying… "here could you fix this pile of cheeeeetos :wink: "
>
> Reach would have not sold as well the first couple of weeks if it did not have the HALO title hanging over it. So I really hope it is like the other Halos’ 2/3, where your simple BR reflexes mattered, and true skills were born. Keep your pace bloom expansion theory for other FPS’ games. Halo is unique to us loyalist.

Someone is narrow minded.
So, what you’re saying is, that if you enjoyed Halo 2/3 “Back in The day”, there is no single possible way to enjoy Reach?
While I agree Reach doesn’t have as large of a player base as Halo 2/3 had before, there are MULTIPLE factors for that happening.

#11

> You lost me once you said " I enjoy Reach…"
>
> Halos’ community has dwindle in numbers due to the severity change made. While Bungie hoped to attract your casual gamers and add your typical "new to Halo" gamers, it failed dramatically in supporting your Loyal gamers. What set Halo apart from your other FPS games is that it was just your typical point and shoot concept. It was fun, competitive, and memorable for years to come.
>
> Reach with it being out only a year has dropped the amount of Loyal gamers, and dropped in sales (maps purchased online) and other factors as well. Bungie pretty much handed 343i the game saying… "here could you fix this pile of cheeeeetos :wink: "
>
> Reach would have not sold as well the first couple of weeks if it did not have the HALO title hanging over it. So I really hope it is like the other Halos’ 2/3, where your simple BR reflexes mattered, and true skills were born. Keep your pace bloom expansion theory for other FPS’ games. Halo is unique to us loyalist.

Bungie did everything they did in Reach not to cater to the casual community but simply to INNOVATE! they took risks and they put a whole lot of heart into their imperfect swan song.

I myself am a casual gamer. what do i look for in a halo game? FUN! that doesn’t mean stupid armor abilties and bloom! if bungie was trying to cater to the casual audience they would do it by upping kill times (they made them longer in Reach). All they were doing is trying something fresh. their trial was an error in many peoples mind’s including mine.

#12

double posst here as well.

#13

I only fear that 343i will be heavily influenced by that portion of the community in order to make a good first impression.

#14

> > You lost me once you said " I enjoy Reach…"
> >
> > Halos’ community has dwindle in numbers due to the severity change made. While Bungie hoped to attract your casual gamers and add your typical "new to Halo" gamers, it failed dramatically in supporting your Loyal gamers. What set Halo apart from your other FPS games is that it was just your typical point and shoot concept. It was fun, competitive, and memorable for years to come.
> >
> > Reach with it being out only a year has dropped the amount of Loyal gamers, and dropped in sales (maps purchased online) and other factors as well. Bungie pretty much handed 343i the game saying… "here could you fix this pile of cheeeeetos :wink: "
> >
> > Reach would have not sold as well the first couple of weeks if it did not have the HALO title hanging over it. So I really hope it is like the other Halos’ 2/3, where your simple BR reflexes mattered, and true skills were born. Keep your pace bloom expansion theory for other FPS’ games. Halo is unique to us loyalist.
>
> Bungie did everything they did in Reach not to cater to the casual community but simply to INNOVATE! they took risks and they put a whole lot of heart into their imperfect swan song.
>
> I myself am a casual gamer. what do i look for in a halo game? FUN! that doesn’t mean stupid armor abilties and bloom! if bungie was trying to cater to the casual audience they would do it by upping kill times (they made them longer in Reach). All they were doing is trying something fresh. their trial was an error in many peoples mind’s including mine.

just FYI, on a Bungie podcast they said it themselves. They were going to add AA and change the way halo had been played “too attract a more noob friendly environment.” They also had mentioned it would either explode a brand new community or fail dramatically. This was addressed to Sage Merril and Derrick Carrol. Fact based buddy. It looks like they bomb in adding the “SR guys” to Bungie, and am glad to see 343i be consisted of mostly H2 guys :slight_smile:

#15

> > > You lost me once you said " I enjoy Reach…"
> > >
> > > Halos’ community has dwindle in numbers due to the severity change made. While Bungie hoped to attract your casual gamers and add your typical "new to Halo" gamers, it failed dramatically in supporting your Loyal gamers. What set Halo apart from your other FPS games is that it was just your typical point and shoot concept. It was fun, competitive, and memorable for years to come.
> > >
> > > Reach with it being out only a year has dropped the amount of Loyal gamers, and dropped in sales (maps purchased online) and other factors as well. Bungie pretty much handed 343i the game saying… "here could you fix this pile of cheeeeetos :wink: "
> > >
> > > Reach would have not sold as well the first couple of weeks if it did not have the HALO title hanging over it. So I really hope it is like the other Halos’ 2/3, where your simple BR reflexes mattered, and true skills were born. Keep your pace bloom expansion theory for other FPS’ games. Halo is unique to us loyalist.
> >
> > Bungie did everything they did in Reach not to cater to the casual community but simply to INNOVATE! they took risks and they put a whole lot of heart into their imperfect swan song.
> >
> > I myself am a casual gamer. what do i look for in a halo game? FUN! that doesn’t mean stupid armor abilties and bloom! if bungie was trying to cater to the casual audience they would do it by upping kill times (they made them longer in Reach). All they were doing is trying something fresh. their trial was an error in many peoples mind’s including mine.
>
> just FYI, on a Bungie podcast they said it themselves. They were going to add AA and change the way halo had been played “too attract a more noob friendly environment.” They also had mentioned it would either explode a brand new community or fail dramatically. This was addressed to Sage Merril and Derrick Carrol. Fact based buddy. It looks like they bomb in adding the “SR guys” to Bungie, and am glad to see 343i be consisted of mostly H2 guys :slight_smile:

wow good find!

#16

Not only did they admit about AA’s and how they could change the game… they also released ANOTHER Podcast basically saying Bloom was implemented WRONG in Reach, and that they would NEVER implement it into any other future game they make from now on. (If they even sell… without “Halo” on it…)

#17

> Someone is narrow minded.
> So, what you’re saying is, that if you enjoyed Halo 2/3 “Back in The day”, there is no single possible way to enjoy Reach?
> While I agree Reach doesn’t have as large of a player base as Halo 2/3 had before, there are MULTIPLE factors for that happening.

the words enjoy and Reach should never be reside next to each other. And to answer your question, Yes that is what I am saying. Call it narrow minded or what have you. The fact remains that Halo was as simple as Golden Eye 007 (great FPS) originality.

If you really like your perks, armor abilities, low gravity, melee system, ringing in your ears upon grenades exploding, fat characters, and limited maps… why not just play Gears, Cod, Battle Field, Crysis and many other FPS games to choose from.

It is not about being narrow minded, but just listing facts on why Reach has failed a loyal community. Reach shot for the stars in the beginning, and is now being handed off. This games’ hype was build too high overall. The true question is would it have sold at all if it did not have Halo hanging over it… “No it would have not”

#18

> > Someone is narrow minded.
> > So, what you’re saying is, that if you enjoyed Halo 2/3 “Back in The day”, there is no single possible way to enjoy Reach?
> > While I agree Reach doesn’t have as large of a player base as Halo 2/3 had before, there are MULTIPLE factors for that happening.
>
> the words enjoy and Reach should never be reside next to each other. And to answer your question, Yes that is what I am saying. Call it narrow minded or what have you. The fact remains that Halo was as simple as Golden Eye 007 (great FPS) originality.
>
> If you really like your perks, armor abilities, low gravity, melee system, ringing in your ears upon grenades exploding, fat characters, and limited maps… why not just play Gears, Cod, Battle Field, Crysis and many other FPS games to choose from.
>
> It is not about being narrow minded, but just listing facts on why Reach has failed a loyal community. Reach shot for the stars in the beginning, and is now being handed off. This games’ hype was build too high overall. The true question is would it have sold at all if it did not have Halo hanging over it… “No it would have not”

What I don’t get is why people -Yoink- about CoD for being the same as it’s always been, when it’s THOSE SAME PEOPLE saying that Halo 4 should stick to basics and not innovate. If you really want to play Halo 3, no one is stopping you. Go play it.
Reach is an enjoyable game to me, I find it risk-taking, innovative, different, and overall, fun. “HURDEPURP, EETZ GAUGHT PERKZZ ITS NOT HALO.” Apparently, you can stick in equipment and get thumbs up, but sprint? Now you -Yoinked!- up. I don’t get it.

#19

> > Someone is narrow minded.
> > So, what you’re saying is, that if you enjoyed Halo 2/3 “Back in The day”, there is no single possible way to enjoy Reach?
> > While I agree Reach doesn’t have as large of a player base as Halo 2/3 had before, there are MULTIPLE factors for that happening.
>
> the words enjoy and Reach should never be reside next to each other. And to answer your question, Yes that is what I am saying. Call it narrow minded or what have you. The fact remains that Halo was as simple as Golden Eye 007 (great FPS) originality.
>
> If you really like your perks, armor abilities, low gravity, melee system, ringing in your ears upon grenades exploding, fat characters, and limited maps… why not just play Gears, Cod, Battle Field, Crysis and many other FPS games to choose from.
>
> It is not about being narrow minded, but just listing facts on why Reach has failed a loyal community. Reach shot for the stars in the beginning, and is now being handed off. This games’ hype was build too high overall. The true question is would it have sold at all if it did not have Halo hanging over it… “No it would have not”

im sorry sir but you are wrong. im not calling you narrow minded or in any way trying to insult your intelligance. unfortunatly i have spelling issues and im also very terrible at typing a good argument (pensil and paper kind of guy) but reach is most definatly enjoyable. and never once i had i gotten the feel it was the same as cod or gears.

#20

What I think will ultimately set Halo apart from other FPS games is the simplicity that has come to define it. Call of Duty games have become progressively more complicated with things like killstreaks, loadouts and classes, and most other big FPS titles these days have done the same thing. I don’t mind innovation, but if Halo follows suit, and adds a lot of unnecessary gimmicks, it will be just another FPS on the market.

In order to bring something unique to the table, I believe Halo needs not to continuously add things, but take away the unnecessary ones. One thing I love about the definitive Halo experience is that everyone starts on an even playing field, everyone has the same weapons and everything else is on the map. Who prevails in a match is determined not by who has the best class or who has played the longest, but by who has the best strategies and skills. I think that in this sense Halo is, crazily enough, a bit like chess, which has been around centuries without what I would call any major changes.