A lot of people, on this forum, are constantly saying Halo 4’s population is dropping because it is missing some features that were present in the previous Halo games and that some of the new additions are ruining the game. Some of those things probably did have an effect on the game’s population but, there is no way for us tell how much of an impact those missing features could have had on Halo 4.
IMO, Halo 4 plays just like the previous Halo games and is suffering due to the lack of new features and gameplay elements to keep the game feeling new and fresh. Here are a ton of articles I’ve found that support my opinion :
> This is more than a bit frustrating. We’ve seen this with Halo’s enemy types, and we’ve seen this with its sandbox, like weapons here. Bungie, and now 343 Industries, has had this sense of “game balance” that hasn’t changed since Halo 2, and they’re clearly afraid of mucking with it and/or -Yoink!- off the hardcore multiplayer fans. As a result, we’ve been stuck with the same enemies, the same weapons, and the same, bloody game engine for close to a decade now. And our first look of new Forerunner weapons are carbon copies of human ones. These are the Forerunners we’re talking about! With technology so advanced it may as well be magic. They can build entire planets, ring worlds, multidimensional rooms, and micro-Dyson spheres in slipspace! They can teleport; they can force stars to collapse, and destroy galaxies. They can preserve people by saving copies of their personality or consciousness onto computers and AIs; they can build armor that sustains the body so that it doesn’t age (or significantly prolong aging at least), need sleep, or food or water–plus other stuff. These are the guys who build technological wonders (and have light bulbs for crying out loud) that last for hundreds of thousands of years… and ammo is somehow still an issue? The Sentinel Beam was limited, but that made sense: it was the broken piece of a combat drone you blew up, I can believe it giving out. There was a wonderful opportunity to do fun, whacky, and interesting things with these weapons.
After Reach, Halo Needs a Revolution
> But Halo’s ability to revolutionize gaming has clearly diminished. From what I’ve read and played so far, Halo: Reach relies on tropes that other first-person shooters already established, such as customizable special abilities and gruesome stealth kills, while the main ingredients — running in circles while shooting, finishing off foes with rifle butts and being really accurate with ranged weapons — haven’t changed at all.
Halo really needs to adapt and innovate in order truly to thrive
> The existence of Halo 4 is one that has worried me since Halo 3, not only am I iffy about whether or not Bungie ever intended for this to exist is one thing, but the other worry is whether or not it will be just another “Halo style” game with a few new weapons and the same exact combat model that we have been using for ten years.
> After one chapter of the campaign and a few rounds of multiplayer, you would assume that Bungie is onto another money-spinner. Nothing about it even hinted new developer. It plays great, but I can’t help but feel 343 missed the golden opportunity to inject some much needed fresh life into the tiring series.
> The campaign was more of the same and while the multiplayer benefits from some nifty tweaks, it’s like going from one year’s Call of Duty to the next. It will probably be a great game, but it’s going to suffer from a classic case of being the 4th game in a trilogy. Finish the Fight…then keep going.
Four Things Halo 4 Must Have to Not Suck
> If you ask me, the Halo games have some the best multiplayer around, and it could be argued that online gaming wouldn’t be where it is today without Halo. That being said, Halo 4 can’t succeed by just playing it safe. With Modern Warfare 3 and Uncharted 3 innovating with new, cinematic oriented multiplayer, 343 is going to have to step it up to stay relevant. Depending on what new enemies Halo 4 has, the multiplayer has the chance of being an entirely different beast. - See more at: http://www.vgchartz.com/article/86648/four-things-halo-4-must-have-to-not-suck/#sthash.5dzyaZRW.dpuf
> I’m not saying that Halo shouldn’t remain a First-Person Shooter, but the series has essentially had the same run and gun gameplay since the first installment, dual-wielding and vehicle jacking notwithstanding. The core mechanics are starting to show their age, so I think it’s time for change. Recent shooters like Bulletstorm and Crysis 2 have shown that there is still innovation to be had in the genre, and I don’t see a reason why Halo 4 can’t innovate as well. - See more at: http://www.vgchartz.com/article/86648/four-things-halo-4-must-have-to-not-suck/#sthash.5dzyaZRW.dpuf
Classic Gameplay Or An Outdated Formula?
> Despite each iteration adding new weapons, modes, and abilities, the core of Halo has remained the same throughout the years: No iron sights, floaty physics, a two weapon limit, and a recharging shield.
> When the original Halo was released, a lot of developers were quick to copy it. But over the years those copycats continued to evolve (if only by copying other innovators), while Halo stayed the same.
> Pros
> + Hearty and addictive multiplayer remains one of the best on any console
> + Surprisingly captivating story
> + Nice graphical improvements and sound design
> + Excellent setpieces and battle sequences return to the classic Halo formula
> Cons
> - No serious evolution to the gameplay
> - Shoehorned extraneous missions feel out of place
> - Classic Halo formula can feel too familiar