My opinions over multiple subjects.

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

I’ve been on the forum shortly, say some weeks or a near total month replying and making posts on the forum. And I’m pleased with the community, it is way better than any of the other forums and such I have been a part of. With a grand total of over 30,000 posts this is the most worth about of over 500 posts I made here, but anyways to my title.

I’ve noticed many subjects over how “horrid”, Halo 5 is.
Halo 5 isn’t a downfall game, so many people have so many opinions but some of them are the truth. But to call it a downfall is a terrible word, as I’ve read multiple articles as Halo 5 being a downfall game, this is somewhat true. 25% of it though, even though people have negative feedback against the game, yet they still play it. You may simply take it back, or sell it to Walmart/Hastings/Gamestop. I don’t get the somewhat hypocrisy of people, if you don’t like things of the game, take it back. I used to do it all the time.

Now, another subject, I see a TON, of people saying, “They should make it more like Halo 3, or Halo CE.” I see this all the time, it is frustrating, this gaming company is making a game futuristic, why? Because the timeline is taking place later on. Yes, I do love Halo 3, I’ve played it for years before I knew what internet even WAS. And if you say, “Look at overwatch, it’s a popular game and the graphics aren’t even that great.”, well, one, 343 isn’t making games like overwatch, they’re making Halo evolve, I suppose? BY THE WAY, if you don’t like the opinions I share and want to criticize harshly, please think before typing, these are my opinions and they shall be said. You can collectively and calmly disagree with me like an human being.

Armor customizations, now this is something I personally agree to, I loved Halo Reach and Halo 3’s armor customizations. The credit system from Reach is a work of genius, that’s the only thing I wish would come back.

Theres still some things I want to share, but my battery is low and I have to sleep for night shift. Please accept the fact I’m not here to criticize others opinions. I’m stating out mine and therefor you may disagree with me, in a calm, and collective manner.

Also. Stop self labeling, calling yourself a “veteran” is just simple annoying. Calling yourself an veteran isn’t making you an superior person to others. So please, a veteran isn’t an existing term for the internet, it’s a worthless title.,

2

I agree with your opinions.

The community -for the most part- is great.

343 is trying

Reach’s customization was the greatest

“Veterans” are pretty annoying.

Well said op.

3

You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.

4

> 2533274832368555;3:
> You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.

I know. It’s the annoying persistence of people who think older is ALWAYS better. Older isn’t always better, though.

5

> 2533274968393436;4:
> > 2533274832368555;3:
> > You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.
>
>
> I know. It’s the annoying persistence of people who think older is ALWAYS better. Older isn’t always better, though.

That’s not my point, not even close.

6

> 2533274832368555;5:
> > 2533274968393436;4:
> > > 2533274832368555;3:
> > > You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.
> >
> >
> > I know. It’s the annoying persistence of people who think older is ALWAYS better. Older isn’t always better, though.
>
>
> That’s not my point, not even close.

Crap sorry, totally wrong thread, though I was on another one, it was for the general discussion. But anyways I do accept the fact people will continuously say what’s what, or state their opinions of some… Unique things.

7

> 2533274968393436;4:
> > 2533274832368555;3:
> > You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.
>
>
> I know. It’s the annoying persistence of people who think older is ALWAYS better. Older isn’t always better, though.

I agree, older isn’t always better, but in Halo’s case Older and even not so-older is better. While I do like the original trilogy a LOT, I’ve always liked having mass amounts of customization, and relaxing/laid back gamemodes to play with friends, so naturally I liked Reach the most, and it’s a tie between 3 and 4 for second. The point is, that while Older games aren’t always better, Halo seems to divert from that, the newer Halos seem more like CoD and the newer CoDs seem more like Halo, isn’t that -bad word- backwards?

8

> 2533274968393436;6:
> > 2533274832368555;5:
> > > 2533274968393436;4:
> > > > 2533274832368555;3:
> > > > You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.
> > >
> > >
> > > I know. It’s the annoying persistence of people who think older is ALWAYS better. Older isn’t always better, though.
> >
> >
> > That’s not my point, not even close.
>
>
> Crap sorry, totally wrong thread, though I was on another one, it was for the general discussion. But anyways I do accept the fact people will continuously say what’s what, or state their opinions of some… Unique things.

No worries mate.

9

> 2535442956515589;7:
> > 2533274968393436;4:
> > > 2533274832368555;3:
> > > You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.
> >
> >
> > I know. It’s the annoying persistence of people who think older is ALWAYS better. Older isn’t always better, though.
>
>
> I agree, older isn’t always better, but in Halo’s case Older and even not so-older is better. While I do like the original trilogy a LOT, I’ve always liked having mass amounts of customization, and relaxing/laid back gamemodes to play with friends, so naturally I liked Reach the most, and it’s a tie between 3 and 4 for second. The point is, that while Older games aren’t always better, Halo seems to divert from that, the newer Halos seem more like CoD and the newer CoDs seem more like Halo, isn’t that -bad word- backwards?

It’s a FPS. And CoD just has the right stuff I suppose. I don’t see anything wrong with making it somewhat like so. All FPS is simple, grenades. Melee, guns, impossible odds of defeating higher ranks, etc.

10

I agree with the OP stating that people who criticize it too much should just return it. There’s no point to have it if all they will do is complain. For example I bought the witcher 3 as the game looked amazing. But as I played it the first 3 days, I wasn’t immersed that well into anything in the game, I gently hated it, so I went to return and had $40 right back in my wallet. That game is no longer a burden to me. Unlike halo 5 I enjoy the hell out of the game, sure I have those moments where I kind of can’t accept one thing but overall I play it more than anything else.

11

> 2533274968393436;9:
> > 2535442956515589;7:
> > > 2533274968393436;4:
> > > > 2533274832368555;3:
> > > > You’re not the first person to make this thread, you won’t be the last, nothing will change. We will probably see another argument in this thread about “what is and isn’t Halo” or “sprint vs. no sprint” though, so there’s that.
> > >
> > >
> > > I know. It’s the annoying persistence of people who think older is ALWAYS better. Older isn’t always better, though.
> >
> >
> > I agree, older isn’t always better, but in Halo’s case Older and even not so-older is better. While I do like the original trilogy a LOT, I’ve always liked having mass amounts of customization, and relaxing/laid back gamemodes to play with friends, so naturally I liked Reach the most, and it’s a tie between 3 and 4 for second. The point is, that while Older games aren’t always better, Halo seems to divert from that, the newer Halos seem more like CoD and the newer CoDs seem more like Halo, isn’t that -bad word- backwards?
>
>
> It’s a FPS. And CoD just has the right stuff I suppose. I don’t see anything wrong with making it somewhat like so. All FPS is simple, grenades. Melee, guns, impossible odds of defeating higher ranks, etc.

well I mean no, not really, Halo should rely on it’s on ideas instead of “borrowing” ideas from games such as CoD and Battlefield, Halo used to be the King of FPS gaming, now it’s just “meh”.

12

> 2533274971565732;2:
> I agree with your opinions.
>
> The community -for the most part- is great.
>
> 343 is trying
>
> Reach’s customization was the greatest
>
> “Veterans” are pretty annoying.
>
> Well said op.

But in their perspective, new players are pretty annoying.

13

What exactly is this post trying to achieve? You’ve got some stop complaining stuff there, a small bit about armor customization, and a tangent about veterans as a title. What’s the discussion?

14

> 2533274812652989;13:
> What exactly is this post trying to achieve? You’ve got some stop complaining stuff there, a small bit about armor customization, and a tangent about veterans as a title. What’s the discussion?

I don’t think you read the title.
Not achieving anything.
Im discussing with others how they feel about some of the things I had opinions on.