My list of ideas for Halo 4

Games Other Halo
#1

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about what was done right/wrong in every Halo game and how I would improve on everything. These ideas, I believe, would satisfy the community by staying true to the core Halo gamelay that we’ve loved for a decade while still changing the game enough to make it feel fresh and new. This will be a long post, btw, so you’ve been warned.

Dual wielding was in interesting idea that wasn’t really implemented correctly when the dual wieldable weapons were designed, with the exception of the Mauler. 1 Mauler could kill by itself, but it was nothing compared to the Shotgun, Sword, Or Hammer. 2 Maulers, however, could beat all 3 of those weapons. Its like cutting a power weapon in half and telling someone to put it together. If all of the DW weapons are made with that philosophy in mind, then it would be a much more interesting dynamic.

As far as AAs go, I like the idea of keeping Sprint and adding stopping power to prevent rushing and running away, but it isn’t necessary if you have higher base move speeds and smaller maps. Sprint’s purpose is to promote map movement, but small maps and higher base speeds would make Sprint pointless. Things like Evade and Jetpack can easily be balanced out by placing them on the maps, and only maps where they don’t break the gameplay. Evade could also be changed so that its more of a strafing tool than a movement tool.

Regardless of what type of enemy we will be facing in campaign, if it had the same size, speed, and hitbox as Spartans, but with a different appearance, then you could have Spartans Vs _____ instead of RvB. This would allow players to use their custom colors in MM while still being able to tell who is friendly or enemy. This gives each player more of an identity instead of being simply known as “The guy with _____ helmet on”.

Being able to select your starting weapons from the options menu would be nice too. It would allow someone to select a pair of weapons that complements their playstyle. You could have, for example, a DMR with its firing rate fixed to be what it is when you pace properly, a BR, Carbine, Needle Rifle, AR, and Plasma Repeater as primaries and the Reach pistol return along with the silenced Pistol and SMG from ODST as secondary sidearms. Obviously, DW weapons would be a no-no as starters since it worked so well before cough Halo2 cough.

So let me know what you think, and if you like my ideas, then help me try to get this thread some attention from the people at 343. Thnx much.

#2

Choosing weapons to fit your playstyle? That would piss a lot of Halo players off, and make Halo another COD. (In the eyes of many)

Also, If all the players chose Black as their custom color, much confusion would occur. As soon as both of the teams have similarly colored players, than there will be confusion. Also, if everyone in a match uses red except one guy who used blue, that guy would be at a disadvantage since its more obvious to the enemy that he’s an enemy. Also, onlly a moron would go into a snow map wearing green. This means that players would choose colors based on what would be most advantegous, not what represents them. (Removing the point)

#3

Good thread.

> Regardless of what type of enemy we will be facing in campaign, if it had the same size, speed, and hitbox as Spartans, but with a different appearance, then you could have Spartans Vs _____ instead of RvB. This would allow players to use their custom colors in MM while still being able to tell who is friendly or enemy. This gives each player more of an identity instead of being simply known as “The guy with _____ helmet on”.

I like this idea a lot. The current version, Spartans vs. Elites, isn’t really that balanced. Not only due to different hitboxes, but also because of the different shield strengths and the Elites’ regenerating health.

> Being able to select your starting weapons from the options menu would be nice too. It would allow someone to select a pair of weapons that complements their playstyle. You could have, for example, a DMR with its firing rate fixed to be what it is when you pace properly, a BR, Carbine, Needle Rifle, AR, and Plasma Repeater as primaries and the Reach pistol return along with the silenced Pistol and SMG from ODST as secondary sidearms.

This is an even better idea. The DMR, BR, carbine, and needle rifle are all pretty much the same–but their slight differences in firepower and magazine size gives each individual player something that he/she feels is best (in their minds). I don’t know about having all three sidearms as choices though, it should be just one, to be decided pre-match by a majority vote. It’s a sidearm–by the time you need it, you’re probably pretty close to dead. Having all three would inevitably mean everyone picks the SMG anyway, just because it fires fastest.

#4

> Good thread.
>
>
>
> > Regardless of what type of enemy we will be facing in campaign, if it had the same size, speed, and hitbox as Spartans, but with a different appearance, then you could have Spartans Vs _____ instead of RvB. This would allow players to use their custom colors in MM while still being able to tell who is friendly or enemy. This gives each player more of an identity instead of being simply known as “The guy with _____ helmet on”.
>
> I like this idea a lot. The current version, Spartans vs. Elites, isn’t really that balanced. Not only due to different hitboxes, but also because of the different shield strengths and the Elites’ regenerating health.
>
>
>
> > Being able to select your starting weapons from the options menu would be nice too. It would allow someone to select a pair of weapons that complements their playstyle. You could have, for example, a DMR with its firing rate fixed to be what it is when you pace properly, a BR, Carbine, Needle Rifle, AR, and Plasma Repeater as primaries and the Reach pistol return along with the silenced Pistol and SMG from ODST as secondary sidearms.
>
> This is an even better idea. The DMR, BR, carbine, and needle rifle are all pretty much the same–but their slight differences in firepower and magazine size gives each individual player something that he/she feels is best (in their minds). I don’t know about having all three sidearms as choices though, it should be just one, to be decided pre-match by a majority vote. It’s a sidearm–by the time you need it, you’re probably pretty close to dead. Having all three would inevitably mean everyone picks the SMG anyway, just because it fires fastest.

I also mentioned the different rifles due to effective ranges and how aggressively/passively you may want to play. I included sidearms based on the way Bungie wanted us to ue the AR/Pistol in Reach, dropping shields with the AR then finishing with a headshot. People who are good with the pistol would use it over the SMG due to its high firing rate and ability to get headshots.

#5

Dual wielding will only work if they did what they did in Halo 2, and start people with a duel-wieldable weapon, (ie. SMG). Duel wielding in Halo 3 didn’t fail because the weapons sucks, it failed because in order for someone to implement it properly, they had to go searching for two different weapons, which might give them a slight advantage in CQC. Most people would just rather use the BR. And this is coming from someone who used SMG/PR religiously in Halo 2.

Armor Abilities should be removed. For starters, they did not have a classic Halo feel. They also disrupted gameplay; namely they broke up the classic triangle of guns/melee/grenades. There are also canon reasons why they should not be included.

No more loadouts. No more weapon choices at game start. This isn’t CoD.

#6

> Dual wielding will only work if they did what they did in Halo 2, and start people with a duel-wieldable weapon, (ie. SMG). Duel wielding in Halo 3 didn’t fail because the weapons sucks, it failed because in order for someone to implement it properly, they had to go searching for two different weapons, which might give them a slight advantage in CQC. Most people would just rather use the BR. And this is coming from someone who used SMG/PR religiously in Halo 2.
>
> Armor Abilities should be removed. For starters, they did not have a classic Halo feel. They also disrupted gameplay; namely they broke up the classic triangle of guns/melee/grenades. There are also canon reasons why they should not be included.
>
> No more loadouts. No more weapon choices at game start. This isn’t CoD.

Dual wields broke Halo because no one wanted to use grenades or melee anymore, because you can’t do either of those.

Multiplayer is not canon. Bungie said this numerous times, so AAs could stay if tweaked, or dropped for something else. It doesnkt matter if its canon or not.

Myself, and every other person who plays Gears never considered selecting a weapon to be making it like CoD. Its just a trend in shooters nowadays. Just like survival gametypes like Horde, Zombies, and Firefight. Its just the nature of game development.

#7

I meant to specify Halo 2 in that last post’s 1st sentence. My phone’s keyboard is meh and doesn’t always register my commands.

#8

i like some of ur ideas but as some said the other ideas would be like another cod and the way halo has been is always different from cod i like cod but they’re both two totally different games and they need to stay that way…wat i will say is that halo reach was a good game but i hope 343 uses a whole new engine for the core gameplay multiplayer matchmaking, campaign, firefight and any other game modes they might be putting in there for halo 4…i must say i was a little disappointed that 343 is using the reach engine for Halo:CE Anniversary multiplayer and firefight because being that Bungie is not developing halo games anymore i expected something different from 343…but i think they used the reach engine again for Halo:CE Anniversary because they’re probably gonna be putting the new stuff in halo 4 (im hoping)!!! we’ll just have to see

#9

> Dual wields broke Halo because no one wanted to use grenades or melee anymore, because you can’t do either of those.
>
> Multiplayer is not canon. Bungie said this numerous times, so AAs could stay if tweaked, or dropped for something else. It doesnkt matter if its canon or not.
>
> Myself, and every other person who plays Gears never considered selecting a weapon to be making it like CoD. Its just a trend in shooters nowadays. Just like survival gametypes like Horde, Zombies, and Firefight. Its just the nature of game development.

That’s not true. In Halo 2, Duel Wielding worked well. In Halo 3 it was garbage. The only thing that changed was that you no longer started with an SMG. Basically, duel wielding should be left out, because the result is just a bunch of underpowered weapons that take up map space.

You missed my point. The main point wasn’t that AA’s aren’t canon. It was that they disrupt gameplay.

That’s because you chose your weapon in Gears in the first game. That’s never been a Halo mechanic, and implementing it would be mimicking those games in which it was a basal mechanic. Also, don’t assume you know what everyone thinks, considering the loadout option in Gears is very much a CoD mechanic.

#10

> > Dual wields broke Halo because no one wanted to use grenades or melee anymore, because you can’t do either of those.
> >
> > Multiplayer is not canon. Bungie said this numerous times, so AAs could stay if tweaked, or dropped for something else. It doesnkt matter if its canon or not.
> >
> > Myself, and every other person who plays Gears never considered selecting a weapon to be making it like CoD. Its just a trend in shooters nowadays. Just like survival gametypes like Horde, Zombies, and Firefight. Its just the nature of game development.
>
> That’s not true. In Halo 2, Duel Wielding worked well. In Halo 3 it was garbage. The only thing that changed was that you no longer started with an SMG. Basically, duel wielding should be left out, because the result is just a bunch of underpowered weapons that take up map space.
>
> You missed my point. The main point wasn’t that AA’s aren’t canon. It was that they disrupt gameplay.
>
> That’s because you chose your weapon in Gears in the first game. That’s never been a Halo mechanic, and implementing it would be mimicking those games in which it was a basal mechanic. Also, don’t assume you know what everyone thinks, considering the loadout option in Gears is very much a CoD mechanic.

The underpowered weapons isue is why I said that the duel wield guns need to be redesigned to support the feature. It would reward the player for putting forth the effort to gather 2 weapons instead of just 1. It took little effort to get 2 SMGs in H2, so it wasn’t was rewarding as it could’ve been, and lowered the number of grenade/melee kills.

AAs only disrupt gameplay if you can start with them. Making them pickups, and removing sprint for higher base speeds and smaller maps, would fix the issues that AAs create.

Both Halo and Cod mimicked Horde and I never heard a singe complaint. Like I said, 1 developer mimicking another is the nature of video game development. No one is trying to make their game just like the other guy’s. They’re simply taking ideas and putting their own spin on them.

You couldn’t select weapons in Gears 1, btw. That wasn’t in until Gears 2.

#11

> There are also canon reasons why they should not be included.

Please elaborate. AA’s were in the Reach campaign, so they are now canon.

#12

Who cares if we can select our weapon loadouts at the beginning of MP matches? I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the only differing thing in those loadouts are the AA’s; everyone starts with the same weapon set and picks up map weapons as they go. It’s only in Firefight that the weapons change (assuming you even picked a gametype that gives you those different options), so why complain? Halo is not, and never will be, Call of Duty. Even if Halo implemented “iron sights” (and don’t get me wrong, I’d scream my throat bloody if they did that), it would still, overall, be Halo–with the same enemies, weapons, vehicles, and game physics. But I don’t see Halo going that route, because the fallout from fans would be loud, abrasive, and enormous, so don’t worry.

#13

> > There are also canon reasons why they should not be included.
>
> Please elaborate. AA’s were in the Reach campaign, so they are now canon.

The short version? Reach melted.