Just a Thought... a Rather Long Thought...

Okay, this could cause a bit of anger amongst the community. I am not trying to be a fire-starter, and I hope responses will at least be somewhat civilized and not rants. I should also state that this is not a rant either. This is just something I have been pondering as I do my homework. Here goes nothing.

Halo is a great series. For the past fourteen years (almost as many years as I’ve been around), Halo has been a powerhouse in the video game world. Master Chief is as iconic as Mario, the music is so good that Ohio State’s marching band played it in their video game show. Needless to say, it’s important. However, there is no debate that Halo is shrinking. Halo 3 was the peak of the series, and population has dropped since about 2009 for all subsequent games. It is also apparent to anyone who frequents this site or the subreddit or anywhere else Halo is discussed that there is a very stark split amongst us. There are pro-343 people, anti-343 people, pro-sprint, anti-sprint, etc. etc. All of these people have differing views about what the cause of this decline is. Some say sprint, others say no content, more say it’s an incompetent developer, even more who say it’s all of the people who constantly bash anything and everything they can. Now I am not saying that anyone here is wrong; there is a lack of content in Halo 5, I will not deny. Sprint is alienating some of the older community. 343 doesn’t exactly have the best reputation. And there is no shortage of complainers on here, and I should say that I don’t mean people who constructively criticize, I mean people who complain about things like the armor color choices not having the EXACT shade of blue they want and then acting like it ruins the game. Halo has plenty of flaws, but so do many other games. So why, then, is Halo dying while games like Call of Duty survive? Ladies and gentlemen, I propose that you think about this: Halo is dying because it can’t do anything to stop its inevitable decline.

Gasps Halo has an inevitable death and there is nothing anyone can do about it? How dare you say that? You need to leave now!” You exclaim at your screen as you begin furiously smashing a rant into the keyboard so hard that it makes your fingers bleed. I know; I don’t want to think about it either. But there is reasoning behind it so go get band--Yoink!- for your fingers, turn off caps-lock, and let me explain. Halo has always been a unique shooter. Even Halo 4, arguably the most deviant from the original formula, was still easily distinguishable from other FPS titles due to power weapons, vehicles, and a story that makes at least a bit of an attempt to be interesting. Halo does things that other shooters never do, and that’s what we, the people on this forum, like. We want a shooter that is about more than just shooting. We want a story with character development and emotion, interesting settings, challenging levels, interesting conflict, and don’t forget the expanded universe that is still canon (eat THAT Star Wars… I still love you). We want a multiplayer experience that is about strategy, skill, balance, difficulty, and making us get creative with the sandbox and mechanics. Unfortunately, that is not what 5 million people want out of a video game, at least not anymore. Call of Duty became really successful starting with MW2 in 2009. It is successful because it allows people to always feel like a badass by lowering skill gap, throwing out strategy, and replacing it with killstreaks and custom classes. People play games to feel awesome when they succeed. It used to come from getting an invincible on the warthog gun or blowing up a scorpion with rockets; now, because it is easier to do, it comes from getting unfair insta-kills with a harrier strike or whatever the overpowered killstreak is this year. This happened because most people don’t want to work for success, so they don’t buy Halo, which makes you work to be really good. Halo is losing population because it doesn’t make people feel like a badass as well as other shooters, but that is not the only reason.

Another reason about which you should consider is, unfortunately, Halo’s age and release schedule. Halo is fourteen years old. That’s older than the majority of people who play Call of Duty. That’s also older than almost every other game series still on the market save a few like Fallout, Madden Football, and Mario games. Halo falls behind new games because the new games follow the Call of Duty format of giving you easy success and overhyping like Titanfall and Watchdogs. These games are designed to draw money out of you and then die. There is a reason why Call of Duty releases annually. Now you might say that Mario does the same thing and it has been relevant since the 1980s. I would respond by saying that its extreme age is why people play it so much. Parents who played the original Mario Bros. as a kid buy their children Mario Party 3000000, or whatever, because they are familiar with Mario. Halo is old, but it hasn’t reached that age, and even if it were, it still wouldn’t be as popular because Mario is more inviting, as Mario is a lovable plumber who jumps on things while Master Chief is a stone cold soldier who kills things with guns, not exactly kid-friendly. Madden is still around because it requires no effort to make and is based off of real life, so they have justification for making a new game. Thought process goes something like this: Joe Shmoe is on the Broncos now; I have to get the new game so my experience is up-to-date. That leaves only Fallout to explain. How can a game that first released in 1997 still be around when there are only FOUR GAMES EVER RELEASED (New Vegas is the equivalent of ODST so it doesn’t really count)??? You see, the answer is in the question, four games is nineteen years. That’s an average of over five years between releases, and there was a ten year split between Fallout 2 and 3. That is a long time to make a game with more content than Halo can in its usual three year dev cycle, and more time for the fans to grow nostalgic towards it. Battlefront is so popular because it has been ten years since its last release. It doesn’t matter how good the game is; people have bought Battlefront because of nostalgia and the new movie (which is also getting hype because of nostalgia, but I digress). Halo doesn’t have enough time between launches for people to be dying for the next one like they do for Fallout.

So where does this leave us? Halo could either lengthen its development cycle to more than three years, release annually, or change its mechanics so you always feel successful. We have tried the last option and it doesn’t really seem to be working. Releasing annually would lower the quality and it would likely lead to people criticizing it for not innovating enough between games… because there isn’t enough time for developers to innovate. A long development cycle could work, but people don’t want to wait that long. We’re stuck. Honestly, I don’t see a way out of this. Now that may sound bad, but maybe we are making a mountain out of a molehill. Halo doesn’t have to be the biggest game ever right now. Maybe Halo can become a more condensed population. Heck, maybe it can spend this time trying to work out kinks and maybe it can return to its original place at the top someday. So let’s work with 343; be constructive with your criticisms. Don’t fanboy or hate. Love Halo. Eat Doritos. Be kind to 343. That simple. Thank you.

I have to say that I questioned Halo’s ability to survive back when Halo 4 came out and it is still the same today, I am not sure if there is any real way to save Halo. Follow the modern games and loose old fan, return to classic and it will eventually become stale ( I love the classic but I understand this is an issue) release more often and it becomes watered down and repetitive and release longer and it risks beings forgotten by some or over hyped which causes more upset when it doesn’t match expectations. I don’t want Halo to die as its my long time favourite series but im not sure if it will really be able to stay steady.

1.) People on this forum love LOVE to claim Halo 4 was a failure. But the truth is it sold near 10 million copies to date. Thats hardly a failure. I know a lot of people that are more casual than people here and they loved the game.
2.) if they had not release COD had not done Black Ops III that game by any other name would not have done as well as prior COD games. COD has also bee on a decline since its peak with Black Ops II. Although still quite successful.
3.) COD remains a powerhouse for a few reasons. 1, its easy to learn and jump into a game. Its not like Halo or Gears. 2. They have the fastest matchmaking of any shooter that at least I know of.
4.) if anything hurt Halo 4 and 5 it was launching both just two weeks prior to COD :black Ops 2 and 3. When they H4 and 5 should have both launched in late Sept.(See Destiny’s launch date)
5. Its also obvious that the disastrous MCC launch has had an effect. Can it be over come. I think it can.

what 343 really needs to do is bring real content and new good gametypes. It would be awesome to see something like Battlefields :Bad Company 2 the gametype Rush. to date BF:BC2 is the most successful of all the BF games.Except make it bigger maps . It would be awesome to see 5 to 10 mantises or tanks on each team fighting on a real battlefield. Fighting for territory. It could be a game changer.

I think they did with the campaign in H5. But for H6. They have really got to bring the content out of the box. If not we will be having this conversation again.

In my honest opinion I wish Halo had stayed down after 3. My honest opinion. I did enjoy 4 for trying something different. Halo 5 I’m really on the fence about I don’t hate it but it’s not my favorite either. It’s like Blast Soda, that needs ice…

> 2533274812438213;4:
> In my honest opinion I wish Halo had stayed down after 3. My honest opinion. I did enjoy 4 for trying something different. Halo 5 I’m really on the fence about I don’t hate it but it’s not my favorite either. It’s like Blast Soda, that needs ice…

That’s honestly the same opinion I have. I like Halo 5, but it’s nowhere near Halo 3 good.

The points you make are pretty accurate. I also think Halo’s population probably declined after the release of MCC too. Although I would rather have Halo keep its larger skill gap than have a smaller skill gap but more players. At that point, I might as well buy CoD.

> 2535425761687659;6:
> The points you make are pretty accurate. I also think Halo’s population probably declined after the release of MCC too. Although I would rather have Halo keep its larger skill gap than have a smaller skill gap but more players. At that point, I might as well buy CoD.

Exactly. That’s the point I’m trying to make. Keep old, challenging mechanics and you don’t keep the population. Bring in new mechanics like CoD, and you make the game uninteresting and alienate old fans, ruining its longevity. We are at an impasse.

Well said, sir.

You really hit the nail on the head with this one. This is basically how I feel about the state of Halo as well.

When speaking of Halo’s decline I usually try to avoid the subjective matters. Lack of content…that’s not really subjective. Having more content wouldn’t harm the game, and it wouldn’t offend anyone. That is one potential cause they can easily focus on without -Yoink!- anyone off, which would at least slow the decline even if not stop it.

> Halo is dying because it can’t do anything to stop its inevitable decline.

I’m not quite ready to believe that, mainly because there’s so many things that haven’t even been tried yet.

> How can a game that first released in 1997 still be around when there are only FOUR GAMES EVER RELEASED (New Vegas is the equivalent of ODST so it doesn’t really count)???

Mate…not only is New Vegas a full blown game with a ton of DLC, it is also miles ahead of Fallout 3 in quality. Those are fighting words.

Actually there were a few other games like Fallout Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel but…well…we don’t speak about those games…

> We have tried the last option and it doesn’t really seem to be working.

Not really. If Halo Reach was the franchise dipping its toes into the metaphorical pool of CoD-isms, and Halo 4 was a full blown dive, then Halo 5 is still wading in the shallow end.

The MCC shows how easy it is to sell something solely off of nostalgia. The MCC offered nothing more to the consumer base than all the classic Halo experiences with a fresh coat of paint, and yet, we had Battlefield and CoD YouTubers, Youtubers who rarely splurge about a rival to their favorite games, like LevelCap and Sp33dy, hyping about the game. Why? Nostalgia! The game woulda been a hit too, if it weren’t for the botched launch, which may not have killed Halo, but it has terminally wounded it. Ultimately, I think Halo’s decline falls on 343. Halo 4 alienated the majority of the Halo fanbase, then MCC insulted anyone left, pushing them away, then H5…the game so controversal among the remaining Halo fanbase, that it drove many Halo YouTubers to try and sever their ties with Halo, including RuL. Why else would ReadyUpLive randomly upload a Destiny apologist video in the middle of the Halo 5 hype? He did play it early, maybe he thought it’d be a flop and needed a Get-Outta-Jail-Free Card in case it did? Who knows.

Mate you have said everything perfectly

> 2533274819302824;10:
> When speaking of Halo’s decline I usually try to avoid the subjective matters. Lack of content…that’s not really subjective. Having more content wouldn’t harm the game, and it wouldn’t offend anyone. That is one potential cause they can easily focus on without -Yoink!- anyone off, which would at least slow the decline even if not stop it.
>
>
> > Halo is dying because it can’t do anything to stop its inevitable decline.
>
>
> I’m not quite ready to believe that, mainly because there’s so many things that haven’t even been tried yet.
>
>
> > How can a game that first released in 1997 still be around when there are only FOUR GAMES EVER RELEASED (New Vegas is the equivalent of ODST so it doesn’t really count)???
>
>
> Mate…not only is New Vegas a full blown game with a ton of DLC, it is also miles ahead of Fallout 3 in quality. Those are fighting words.
>
> Actually there were a few other games like Fallout Tactics and Brotherhood of Steel but…well…we don’t speak about those games…
>
>
> > We have tried the last option and it doesn’t really seem to be working.
>
>
> Not really. If Halo Reach was the franchise dipping its toes into the metaphorical pool of CoD-isms, and Halo 4 was a full blown dive, then Halo 5 is still wading in the shallow end.

Ok, maybe New Vegas is a full game, but the amount of time obsidian put into making the game’s engine and assets is equivalent to Bungie with ODST. I’ll leave you the benefit of the doubt :stuck_out_tongue:
Anyway, I say it hasn’t been working because of how population has dropped consistently with each new game since Reach People clearly don’t like the changes.

I grew up on Mario and the NES, and I don’t even play that or Nintendo anymore really. I also was a fan and biased toward how we did LAN parties when Halo:CE was out 14 years ago. So, I have been bashing Bungie a lot over the years since they didn’t do a good job of providing my same nastalgic gameplay. Then I got burned out over it during Halo 3, where I moved to various other FPS games, then didn’t play much Reach and H4 but didn’t like how the abilities were introduced and among many other things.

Halo 5 is kind of refreshing for once and the professional play is very exciting compared to H2 and 3 I think. I actually go in Customs and try to practice things, which I haven’t done since Halo:CE or maybe H2 to be honest. It’s frustrating at times, but I see all the good things about it and find it hard to bash 343 as much as I did Bungie.

I think the game will survive, especially if people do less subjective reasoning and more playing the game and getting their friends to play it. People like to share opinions of others, good or bad, so it’s better to feed them positivity.

> 2760465307323250;14:
> I think the game will survive, especially if people do less subjective reasoning and more playing the game and getting their friends to play it. People like to share opinions of others, good or bad, so it’s better to feed them positivity.

Wait, why?

It’s because you like it, isn’t it? Lol.

> 2533274825101441;3:
> 1.) People on this forum love LOVE to claim Halo 4 was a failure. But the truth is it sold near 10 million copies to date. Thats hardly a failure. I know a lot of people that are more casual than people here and they loved the game.

Therefore, in the immortal words of everybody and their mother who replied to my disdainful posts about Halo 5 this year, “Let them play the MCC.”

Besides, the population unequivocally died. Halo 4 sold well before anybody played the game. It was literally successful because of Bungie’s legacy. Now that 343’s gone very far out of their way to craft their own legacy?

> 2533274825101441;3:
> 2.) if they had not release COD had not done Black Ops III that game by any other name would not have done as well as prior COD games. COD has also bee on a decline since its peak with Black Ops II. Although still quite successful.

Alright, I deciphered this to mean that Call of Duty is a money making name and nothing else at this point. I’d say the same has been true of Halo since…2004.

> 2533274825101441;3:
> 3.) COD remains a powerhouse for a few reasons. 1, its easy to learn and jump into a game. Its not like Halo or Gears. 2. They have the fastest matchmaking of any shooter that at least I know of.

Million dollar advertisements reeling in starry-eyed new gamers don’t hurt. I wonder how many CoD players would feel more at home playing Quake, but were just born in the wrong generation.

> 2533274825101441;3:
> 4.) if anything hurt Halo 4 and 5 it was launching both just two weeks prior to COD :black Ops 2 and 3. When they H4 and 5 should have both launched in late Sept.(See Destiny’s launch date)

And yet, Halo 3 and Reach stood up to a combined total of 5 CoD’s during their population peaks and held it there without Halo 4’s vertigo-inducing downward spiral.

> 2533274825101441;3:
> 5. Its also obvious that the disastrous MCC launch has had an effect. Can it be over come. I think it can.

First the game has to work. Still has a few bugs.

> 2533274825101441;3:
> what 343 really needs to do is bring real content and new good gametypes. It would be awesome to see something like Battlefields :Bad Company 2 the gametype Rush. to date BF:BC2 is the most successful of all the BF games.Except make it bigger maps . It would be awesome to see 5 to 10 mantises or tanks on each team fighting on a real battlefield. Fighting for territory. It could be a game changer.

I agree that new gametypes is a good idea. It’s always a good idea. But I’m pretty sure you just described Warzone. I’m not familiar with Rush from BF:BC2, but what you just described within a “Halo” frame of reference sounded exactly like Warzone.

(And personally, I’d like confirmation they can make PREVIOUS gametypes work.)

> 2533274825101441;3:
> I think they did with the campaign in H5. But for H6. They have really got to bring the content out of the box. If not we will be having this conversation again.

I tend to think the campaign should be a place for physics setpieces the player couldn’t recreate if he tried. Also, keeping Brian Reed from even writing his initials into the walls of 343’s bathroom would be a major improvement in Halo 6.

Halo 5 is a good game. Yes, that is something I, and many others, can agree on.
However, it is missing many features (You know the list, I won’t repeat it)
But with the support it is receiving, the content issues should be fixed.

Halo 5, however, is far superior to 4 and Reach, in terms of out of box Multiplayer. it feels more like Halo than the former did.

> 2535421619942348;15:
> > 2760465307323250;14:
> > I think the game will survive, especially if people do less subjective reasoning and more playing the game and getting their friends to play it. People like to share opinions of others, good or bad, so it’s better to feed them positivity.
>
>
> Wait, why?
>
> It’s because you like it, isn’t it? Lol.

I’m a realist. And, it’s because some people who like the game don’t play because so and so says it sucks.

I do like it though; it’s kinda like CellFactor:PW minus the classes and jump height. I like it as much as all the well known Pros like the game, and if 343 is going to cater to the Competitive Scene then sure I’ll support them, as long as it moves in an upward direction.

Now go back to TeamBeyond; your crying is missed. :stuck_out_tongue:

Yeah 100% agree. The reason Halo is failing is because young “Pro” CoD player: Tommy plays a single match of Halo and gets destroyed and forever hates it and tells his friends that Halo sucks and if you play Halo you are a loser. And this plague spread. There is but one cure: Warzone.

> 2533274928710760;18:
> Yeah 100% agree. The reason Halo is failing is because young “Pro” CoD player: Tommy plays a single match of Halo and gets destroyed and forever hates it and tells his friends that Halo sucks and if you play Halo you are a loser. And this plague spread. There is but one cure: Warzone.

Firefight called.

> 2533274845184898;1:
> Halo is fourteen years old. That’s older than the majority of people who play Call of Duty.

This one made me chuckle^^

> 2533274845184898;1:
> We want a story with character development and emotion, interesting settings, challenging levels, interesting conflict, and don’t forget the expanded universe that is still canon (eat THAT Star Wars… I still love you).

Word. #TrEU is love. #TrEU is life.

> 2533274845184898;1:
> Battlefront is so popular because it has been ten years since its last release. It doesn’t matter how good the game is; people have bought Battlefront because of nostalgia and the new movie (which is also getting hype because of nostalgia, but I digress).

Okay. So we need the same amount of hype. The solution should be pretty obvious: Make that movie that’s been handed around for over a decade. And I’m not talking about those direct-to-DVD productions that serve as merchandise and advertising for each new game release. Take the Alex Garland script. (I’ve read it. It’s good.) Bring Blomkamp back on board. And stop being -Yoinks!- about the financing.

> 2533274845184898;1:
> Releasing annually would lower the quality and it would likely lead to people criticizing it for not innovating enough between games… because there isn’t enough time for developers to innovate.

A) Halo is already releasing anually. That was Microsofts goal ever since Halo 3.
Halo 3 (2007) -> Wars (planned for 2008) -> ODST (2009) -> Reach (2010) -> Halo CE Anniversary (2011) -> Halo 4(2012) -> Spartan Assault (2013) -> MCC (2014) -> H5G (2015) -> Wars 2 (probably 2016) -> Halo 3 Anniversary? (2017) -> Halo 6? (2018)

B) So what? I actually think that Halo could seriously benefit from an annual (or at least more frequent) release cycle, if you’re clever with it. The mistake you and everybody else is making is to think in terms of CoD, where they just re-release the same game with minor updates. I’m rather thinking of two series running in parallel: One with the classig gameplay, and one with the augmented gameplay. Have one of them developed by 343I and the other one by Sabre, Certain Affinity or even Gearbox. (They did pretty well on Halo PC, imho.) That way, gamers get more frequent content, Microsoft gets more income and both sides of the fanbase split get what they want without the other side being left in the dust. Throw in a Halo Wars or Spartan Assault or ODST or any other type of spinoff every third year to bridge the gap between releases and you’re golden.