Let's Get Back to Basics

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

The closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the more successful the game will be.

This is what Halo was about, and hopefully will be in he future. The inclusion of visible, skill based ranking and visible, time based ranking in conjunction makes for a reward experience not present in any other current title. This alone was the incentive to go forward.

Gameplay:
This has changed so drastically that I couldn’t find the fun. With Reach, it was a hard change, not the soft morph from h2 to h3, and over time I fell into line and enjoyed the time I played Reach, but found the experience to be one of unfortunate emptiness. While I logged my fair share of gametime while I was playing the game, I soon found myself away from the franchise. Halo 4 was the tipping point. While not a poor game in an of itself, it certainly wasn’t a Halo experience I was excited about as evidenced by my gametime there. The addition of sprint to this franchise has been the single most detrimental function to ever exist. It has impacted interactions, map design, map flow, and everything that was once held as a constant in this game, and all for the worst. Removing a separate sprint function will be the single best move that can occur. Besides, sprint was always present in the first three titles as an unconscious aspect of the game it was so much better then. Keep the impact of armor abilities/equipment/w/e it is we will see next (gasp) as a soft influence on gameplay.

Maps:
These maps which are all a series of stretched Hallways (the wonderful design of an added sprint influence) are boring. B-O-R-I-N-G. What ever happened to map based weapons, map control, weapon control, and map movement. These maps look beautiful, sure, bravo, but it is not a suitable gameplay environment. Do no design maps around sprint. This franchise’s success (first 4 titles) evidences this claim.

Weapons:
NO real complaints other than the lackluster BR sound. I was so unenthused with this games that I’ve never taken the time to learn or use all of the weapons. I’m largely indifferent (keep br though)

Playlists:
Bring unto us once again the ranked/social split. It makes obvious which type of gameplay environment you are entering. Otherwise we have a mixture of players sweating behind their screens in a maxed out party against a mixture of players misfortunate enough to match as individuals against this diehard team. That’s not fun for any party involved (or it shouldn’t be).

Long and short:
Bring the next title as close to the series pinnacle as possible. This is what the players have been historically proven to enjoy, and will enjoy for years to come should the decisions be made correctly. The games have a good story, so I will look into that, but hopes are not high. We should make this franchise reach the potential once present, a title which rivals the current giant…or even exceeds it.

2

> The closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the more successful the game will be.

The opposite of that is true.

remember when legendary slayer, the game type resembling halo 2 was its own playlist? well there was only every a few hundred people in that playlist at any given time. It doesn’t get picked often now in infinity slayer either. Not many want what you are suggesting.

the closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the less successful the game will be.

3

> The closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the more successful the game will be.

You think that, you believe that, but you don’t know that. Not with absolute certainty. And all the proof that this forum can conjure to “prove” that statement, seemingly just posting about H4’s population drop over and over, does everything but.

We need to move away from statement like this and move more towards personal statements (exmaple: Halo 4 was a disappointment for me and many people I know because it was too different from Halo 2 and Halo 3) and mentioning objective problems.

4

I’ve never heard of that gametype, and I doubt many others have who sympathize with my sentiment. But based on your statement, how could a gametype which appeals to players not playing that game ever be successful?

It is akin to having a pork dinner at a Jewish festival and stating that is simply isn’t popular food. Maybe not within that specific community which is not looking for that kind of meal, but for many others in the world, absolutely.

5

If anything an advancement from halo 2/3 has to be made. Having carbon copies is what will turn the franchises games into predictable and somewhat boring shooter. Halo 2/3 were amazing but its time to move on. If a compromise between classic and new can be achieved with some playlists using AAs and loadouts and others not using those things, the community would be happier and the game would still adavance.

6

I have to say that the Halo 3 maps when Forge came in there wasn’t much good one only 2 of them were good(IMO) most of them were bast on Forging them so to me the maps that 343i made was a good fit in Halo 4. I think that maps in Halo Xbox One is going to be good for the game-play of it 343i also did a good job on making DLC map pack.

7

> If anything an advancement from halo 2/3 has to be made. Having carbon copies is what will turn the franchises games into predictable and somewhat boring shooter. Halo 2/3 were amazing but its time to move on. If a compromise between classic and new can be achieved with some playlists using AAs and loadouts and others not using those things, the community would be happier and the game would still adavance.

So agree.

8

Statements like “we have to return to Halo 2/3 to make Halo successful again” or the opposite “we have to continue the way of Halo 4 to make it successful” are both completely subjective, unless you can verify them with scientific proof.

Besides, I’ve always thought it is quite funny that Halo’s multiplayer is often considered its main factor to be successful and apparently the massive impact of Halo’s Campaign on its success is nearly or even entirely disregarded.

9

> <mark>Statements like “we have to return to Halo 2/3 to make Halo successful again” or the opposite “we have to continue the way of Halo 4 to make it successful” are both completely subjective, unless you can verify them with scientific proof.</mark>
>
> Besides, I’ve always thought it is quite funny that Halo’s mulitplayer is often considered its main factor to be successful and apparently the massive impact of Halo’s Campaign on its success is nearly or even entirely disregarded.

Gotta find that balance.

10

> > <mark>Statements like “we have to return to Halo 2/3 to make Halo successful again” or the opposite “we have to continue the way of Halo 4 to make it successful” are both completely subjective, unless you can verify them with scientific proof.</mark>
> >
> > Besides, I’ve always thought it is quite funny that Halo’s mulitplayer is often considered its main factor to be successful and apparently the massive impact of Halo’s Campaign on its success is nearly or even entirely disregarded.
>
> Gotta find that balance.

I also think that compromises should or even have to be made in several fields.

However, before all that I think Halo has to find a clear identity again in regard to multiplayer.
Halo 4’s multiplayer lacks of a clear identity in my opinion. I think it isn’t a proper Arena Shooter but it isn’t a proper Class Based Shooter either. It seem like it tried to be both but eventually ended up being nothing really recognizable or individual.

11

> > The closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the more successful the game will be.
>
> You think that, you believe that, but you don’t know that. Not with absolute certainty. And all the proof that this forum can conjure to “prove” that statement, seemingly just posting about H4’s population drop over and over, does everything but.
>
> We need to move away from statement like this and move more towards personal statements (exmaple: Halo 4 was a disappointment for me and many people I know because it was too different from Halo 2 and Halo 3) and mentioning objective problems.

I disagree. Who is playing Halo 4 right now? People who LIKE Infinity settings. If we had legendary slayer from the beginning I think legendary slayer would have excelled.

12

Having NEW stuff is a good and bad thing when you dont give the people an option to play the old.

We were forced with infinity settings at the start and it made alot of players dislike Halo 4 and move to a different game. I myself went back to halo 3 and reach just because i liked the gameplay and the balance.

Looking at legendary slayer’s population isnt a very reliable source considering it came out months after release and at this time Halo 4 lost a huge portion of its population.

I feel a classic playlist can be successful off launch and this is what most people want is for a classic feel for a game they know and love but change also needs to happen to keep a game from getting old and stale. The way 343 did it was wrong and it was unjust because of the force. They took months to make a classic playlist which IMO shouldnt of taken that long. I made a gametype for classic in 20 mins.

The problem that came with infinity was that there was no balance when it came to ordnance and loadouts.

Loadouts should be limited to AA and Perks only not weapons.

My example

Team Slayer

AR
Pistol

Team BRs

BR
AR

Weapons on maps Default

Team DMRs

DMR
AR

Weapons on Map Default
Covie Slayer

Carbine
PP

Weapons on map Covenant
Forrunner Slayer

LR
BS

Weapons on map Forrunner

This makes for a more balance game and more of an arena shooter then a loadout shooter.

This is all my opinion and i dont feel i speak for the community.

13

> > If anything an advancement from halo 2/3 has to be made. Having carbon copies is what will turn the franchises games into predictable and somewhat boring shooter. Halo 2/3 were amazing but its time to move on. If a compromise between classic and new can be achieved with some playlists using AAs and loadouts and others not using those things, the community would be happier and the game would still adavance.
>
> So agree.

As do I.

14

> Statements like “we have to return to Halo 2/3 to make Halo successful again” or the opposite “we have to continue the way of Halo 4 to make it successful” are both completely subjective, unless you can verify them with scientific proof.
>
> Besides, I’ve always thought it is quite funny that Halo’s mulitplayer is often considered its main factor to be successful and apparently the massive impact of Halo’s Campaign on its success is nearly or even entirely disregarded.

I agree that asking for Halo to be exactly like Halo 2/3 is a horrible idea. The game franchise would eventually lose to other franchises if Halo never tried anything different.
I also find it to be a joke that a lot of people think that the Multiplayer alone makes Halo good. They’re also the same people that are willing to ditch Halo if the Multiplayer doesn’t meet their standards, even if the Campaign is good.

15

For those who believe that staying 100% true to original mechanics would guarantee everlasting success:

Look what just happened to Call of Duty. Not many people liked Ghosts, in fact, it’s easily the least successful Call of Duty to date. During the reign of Black Ops II, 85% of my friends list played in non-stop, yet now, with Ghosts, a few weeks after launch, only 12% of my friends list play.

The fact that the percentage of people that I know playing Call of Duty has gone from 85% to 12% really speaks something.

I even asked a lot of them on why they didn’t get Ghosts…

They said it was due to “the lack of innovation and how all of the features that made BO2 so great were removed”. They said that the new additions in Ghosts, such as Squad Mode and Extinction mode, were lackluster overall. And finally, they said that compared to the Modern Warfare and Black Ops II’s Campaign, Ghosts seemed like it was written the way South Park would imitate it.

That’s significant…

After the fate that Call of Duty is about to endure, should we really want to make a 180 and abolish all that Halo 4 added?

The Titan is rising. Call of Duty’s star is waning and Titanfall’s is waxing.

They say that the ghosts you make come to haunt you, and Activision has made two. Respawn, and Call of Duty: Ghosts.

Let’s use Call of Duty as an example of what not to do. If we fail to innovate, despite the fact that what was set in stone was perfect, our Ghosts will come to haunt us.

The Titan is rising, and so must Halo.

16

> > > The closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the more successful the game will be.
> >
> > You think that, you believe that, but you don’t know that. Not with absolute certainty. And all the proof that this forum can conjure to “prove” that statement, seemingly just posting about H4’s population drop over and over, does everything but.
> >
> > We need to move away from statement like this and move more towards personal statements (exmaple: Halo 4 was a disappointment for me and many people I know because it was too different from Halo 2 and Halo 3) and mentioning objective problems.
>
> <mark>I disagree. Who is playing Halo 4 right now? People who LIKE Infinity settings. If we had legendary slayer from the beginning I think legendary slayer would have excelled.</mark>

I disagree with your statement. Just because Halo 4 isn’t exactly like Halo 2/3 it doesn’t mean that’s the reason for the low population. Sorry if I sound like I’m being rude, but I stop taking you seriously the moment I read your comment.

17

> For those who believe that staying 100% true to original mechanics would guarantee everlasting success:
>
> Look what just happened to Call of Duty. Not many people liked Ghosts, in fact, it’s easily the least successful Call of Duty to date. During the reign of Black Ops II, 85% of my friends list played in non-stop, yet now, with Ghosts, a few weeks after launch, only 12% of my friends list play.
>
> The fact that the percentage of people that I know playing Call of Duty has gone from 85% to 12% really speaks something.
>
> I even asked a lot of them on why they didn’t get Ghosts…
>
> They said it was due to “the lack of innovation and how all of the features that made BO2 so great were removed”. They said that the new additions in Ghosts, such as Squad Mode and Extinction mode, were lackluster overall. And finally, they said that compared to the Modern Warfare and Black Ops II’s Campaign, Ghosts seemed like it was written the way South Park would imitate it.
>
> That’s significant…
>
> ---------------
>
> After the fate that Call of Duty is about to endure, should we really want to make a 180 and abolish all that Halo 4 added?
>
> The Titan is rising. Call of Duty’s star is waning and Titanfall’s is waxing.
>
> They say that the ghosts you make come to haunt you, and Activision has made two. Respawn, and Call of Duty: Ghosts.
>
> Let’s use Call of Duty as an example of what not to do. If we fail to innovate, despite the fact that what was set in stone was perfect, our Ghosts will come to haunt us.
>
> The Titan is rising, and so must Halo.

Halo is far form over :slight_smile:

18

> You think that, you believe that, but you don’t know that.

I enjoyed Halo 3 and even I believe it.

Halo is dead. There is no saving it without completely perverting what it was to begin with. I can’t wait to prone on blood gulch with nerfed strafe, spawning with a nerfed sniper rifle.

I like to sit here on the forums debating and proposing new ideas for the fun of it. But I already know nothing is gonna save Halo for me at this point.

> During the reign of Black Ops II, 85% of my friends list played in non-stop, yet now, with Ghosts, a few weeks after launch, only 12% of my friends list play.

What do your friends play now? That alone could be an interesting discussion.
I’d like to know what people are playing when they’ve given up on CoD.

As for innovation, I’m not against it, but nothing being added is innovative. Titanfall isn’t innovative either, I’m tired of it being hailed as such. Mechs, classes, and even wallrunning have been in FPS’s since the days of the first xbox.

I think Titanfall looks like a good game, but it’s NOT INNOVATIVE.

> Ghosts seemed like it was written the way South Park would imitate it.
>
> That’s significant…

It’s funny because it’s true.

Remember that episode where all the adults dressed like bane? Pretty much the same as all the soldiers trying to be ghost.

Just imagine Cartman doing the trailer in his narrative -Yoink!- voice. It’s just too perfect.

19

> > You think that, you believe that, but you don’t know that.
>
> I enjoyed Halo 3 and even I believe it.
>
> Halo is dead. There is no saving it without completely perverting what it was to begin with. I can’t wait to prone on blood gulch with nerfed strafe, spawning with a nerfed sniper rifle.
>
> I like to sit here on the forums debating and proposing new ideas for the fun of it. But I already know nothing is gonna save Halo for me at this point.
>
>
>
> > During the reign of Black Ops II, 85% of my friends list played in non-stop, yet now, with Ghosts, a few weeks after launch, only 12% of my friends list play.
>
> What do your friends play now? That alone could be an interesting discussion.
> I’d like to know what people are playing when they’ve given up on CoD.
>
>
> As for innovation, I’m not against it, but nothing being added is innovative. Titanfall isn’t innovative either, I’m tired of it being hailed as such. Mechs, classes, and even wallrunning have been in FPS’s since the days of the first xbox.
>
> I think Titanfall looks like a good game, but it’s NOT INNOVATIVE.
>
>
>
> > Ghosts seemed like it was written the way South Park would imitate it.
> >
> > That’s significant…
>
> It’s funny because it’s true.
>
> Remember that episode where all the adults dressed like bane? Pretty much the same as all the soldiers trying to be ghost.
>
> Just imagine Cartman doing the trailer in his narrative -Yoink!- voice. It’s just too perfect.

That’s a pretty interesting statement, why do you think it’s dead? Why don’t you think it will do better next time? Nast gen could provide a nice boost. I’m sure it did for halo 3, a next generation halo game is likely going to get people excited.

20

> > The closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the more successful the game will be.
>
> The opposite of that is true.
>
> remember when legendary slayer, the game type resembling halo 2 was its own playlist? well there was only every a few hundred people in that playlist at any given time. It doesn’t get picked often now in infinity slayer either. Not many want what you are suggesting.
>
> the closer this game comes to Halo2/3, the less successful the game will be.

Legendary slayer was released around 8 months after Halo 4 launched, needless to say most Halo fans that were expecting a classic or traditional Multiplayer experience had left long before then. On top of that Legendary slayer was horribly made when it started. AR-only starts, poor PW placement, and a number of other factors made the gameplay horrible. Then to finish it all of, 343i moved the gametype into the Team Slayer playlist, where people wanting to play LS now had to compete with people that wanted IS every time players were matched. Despite the making a positive change of adding BR’s to start with, this was enough to get anyone who was on the fence to jump ship.

If you really think that going back to the H2/H3 gameplay is bad, despite online population sharply & massively decreasing with Halo 4’s new gameplay, then I don’t know how to help you.