Not Call Of Duty?

Many fans hope that Infinite will be old-school Halo. Also I’m guessing that there are those saying that if they want CoD, they’ll play that instead, and that Halo shouldn’t become it. Doom 4 was originally going to be another military shooter, but then went old-school like the original Doom. Can’t Halo follow the same path as Doom?

Oh, oh no, nobody actually wants old-school style Halo, everyone’s been very outspoken about wanting the next Halo to be Halo-of-Duty, with sprint, custom classes, killstreaks, stuff like that. Haven’t you been reading the forums?

/s.

> 2535462145233570;2:
> Oh, oh no, nobody actually wants old-school style Halo, everyone’s been very outspoken about wanting the next Halo to be Halo-of-Duty, with sprint, custom classes, killstreaks, stuff like that. Haven’t you been reading the forums?
>
> /s.

That is such a huge shame.

It seems like Reach (with all due respect to that game, it’s still my personal favorite in the series) opened up the CoD/contemporary shooter comparison floodgates in a way that Halo hadn’t ever been involved in before and hasn’t been able to get away from ever since.

In implementing sprint and other FPS industry standards of its time, Reach ceased being a wholly different flavor of proverbial ice cream from CoD/Battlefield. People started comparing them more directly, and there became a contingent of crossover players who wanted to see the line blurred even more.

I don’t know if 343i can ever really shut this Pandora’s box. It’s not as though Halo ever existed in a vacuum from other prominent FPS games, it just used to be the peanut butter to their chocolate. Now it’s trying to be Reeces, to very mixed effect. Unlike the analogy I’m using, the mix of traditional Halo sensibilities and other contemporary shooter tropes certainly does not please all tastes.

> 2535462145233570;2:
> Oh, oh no, nobody actually wants old-school style Halo, everyone’s been very outspoken about wanting the next Halo to be Halo-of-Duty, with sprint, custom classes, killstreaks, stuff like that. Haven’t you been reading the forums?
>
> /s.

On a serious note I actually don’t mind any of those things. I’m actually completely neutral on sprint, so whether it stays or goes I really don’t care I’ll have just as much fun. However, sprint is in no way a cod thing. Every single fps today has it.

Custom classes were only in Halo Reach and 4, and while I agree they should be in at most only a few playlists, they did make for some really fun customs.

I actually really like killstreaks. Not only does it help me keep track of how good I’m doing, but it also increases the pucker factor the bigger and bigger killstreak medals I rack up. Makes it more fun.

> 2533274861158694;4:
> It seems like Reach (with all due respect to that game, it’s still my personal favorite in the series) opened up the CoD/contemporary shooter comparison floodgates in a way that Halo hadn’t ever been involved in before and hasn’t been able to get away from ever since.
>
> In implementing sprint and other FPS industry standards of its time, Reach ceased being a wholly different flavor of proverbial ice cream from CoD/Battlefield. People started comparing them more directly, and there became a contingent of crossover players who wanted to see the line blurred even more.
>
> I don’t know if 343i can ever really shut this Pandora’s box. It’s not as though Halo ever existed in a vacuum from other prominent FPS games, it just used to be the peanut butter to their chocolate. Now it’s trying to be Reeces, to very mixed effect. Unlike the analogy I’m using, the mix of traditional Halo sensibilities and other contemporary shooter tropes certainly does not please all tastes.

Reach isn’t like CoD. Also, sprinting is an armor ability in the game, not a mechanic.

> 2535435425251123;6:
> > 2533274861158694;4:
> > It seems like Reach (with all due respect to that game, it’s still my personal favorite in the series) opened up the CoD/contemporary shooter comparison floodgates in a way that Halo hadn’t ever been involved in before and hasn’t been able to get away from ever since.
> >
> > In implementing sprint and other FPS industry standards of its time, Reach ceased being a wholly different flavor of proverbial ice cream from CoD/Battlefield. People started comparing them more directly, and there became a contingent of crossover players who wanted to see the line blurred even more.
> >
> > I don’t know if 343i can ever really shut this Pandora’s box. It’s not as though Halo ever existed in a vacuum from other prominent FPS games, it just used to be the peanut butter to their chocolate. Now it’s trying to be Reeces, to very mixed effect. Unlike the analogy I’m using, the mix of traditional Halo sensibilities and other contemporary shooter tropes certainly does not please all tastes.
>
> Reach isn’t like CoD. Also, sprinting is an armor ability in the game, not a mechanic.

Reach started the trends that 4 and partially 5 continued. While I personally don’t think 4 is anything like cod, many people think otherwise.

What I’m saying is that the trend of Halo being compared so directly to CoD and other contemporary shooters began with Reach beginning to implement modern shooter mechanics outside of the traditional Halo gameplay stable.

Reach is my favorite game in the series, so I definitely didn’t mean to insinuate that it too much resembles CoD. It just seemed like the first time in the history of this series when Halo was implementing ideas similar to those from other games instead of maintaining its own strong and independent identity.

Just an observation on my part. I’m open to arguments to the contrary, but I think that just saying that Reach isn’t like CoD doesn’t invalidate my point. Also, Armor Abilities aren’t base player traits, but they are game mechanics, and in most matchmaking, they were present as spawn loadouts (as opposed to map pickup power ups in Halo 3)

Not trying to start a flame war or get too hung up on semantics, like I say, this is just my personal reasoning based on my own observations. Also, since I didn’t make this clear in my original response, I’m more of a fan of the classic than the modern mechanics of Halo myself, so I think we can agree on at least that point, OP.

I’m all for things that increase the skill ceiling. Halo 3 had equipment, Reach had armor abilities, Guardians has Spartan abilities. Each of these work well in each game. Yes it does take away from the “classic experience,” but if it works then why not use it. Utilize the tools given to you. Games evolve and so do mechanics.

> 2535450418639942;9:
> I’m all for things that increase the skill ceiling. Halo 3 had equipment, Reach had armor abilities, Guardians has Spartan abilities. Each of these work well in each game. Yes it does take away from the “classic experience,” but if it works then why not use it. Utilize the tools given to you. Games evolve and so do mechanics.

The issue there is that Halo 5’s mechanics make the game feel generic. Returning to a more classic gameplay style would make Halo unique and feel like Halo again.

I think the biggest problem is that, because each popular brand has sort of chosen its path (Halo having the triforce of power balance, CoD/BF focusing more on ‘realistic’ combat styles (slide, clamber, grapple, rappel, etc), and well, whatever TF has going for it, I’m assuming a combo of BF and CoD?) initially, whenever any of them cross paths with a competitor, suddenly it’s a problem.

Our belief is that; because a game started one way, it should never stray far from the origin. When it does, suddenly it’s trying to copy someone else.

My personal opinion is that; we don’t get upset when newborns learn how to walk, claiming they’re ‘copying those who learned far before them’. Or when they learn a skill thousands if not millions learned beforehand. So why should we get upset when things like mechanics appear in later games? These things are simply just abilities we, the player, are granted. It allows us to maneuver and control the battlefield. Bungie was more interested in making something that was its own thing, and that’s fine, because at the time every developer was trying to figure out what they wanted their games to be like. Games wanted to stand out and be different, even if they had the same developer.

343i wants a more realistic take on Halo, they want to make it more realistically immersive. I’m perfectly ok with that, I love both the Bungie era and the 343i era games equally (with the exception to Guardians…). So many people get upset that Chief, Blue Team, every Spartan-IV can suddenly just clamber over things and run across the battlefield. They’re super soldiers in armor that enhances their normal abilities, to me, that just makes sense. Like, you tell me these are Humanity’s greatest protectors and yet they can’t mantle over things? They can’t do more than a power walk (which, granted, is faster than a normal human, but still)? Simple mechanics that just became available seem like they should have been there from the start lore wise (I haven’t read the books, so they probably have been).

TL;DR: I’m not sure why simple mechanics like sprinting, clambering, etc are deemed ‘CoD abilities’ simply because CoD is one of the most popular series to incorporate those things over time. They can’t lay claim to a mechanic unless it’s unique, sprinting and climbing are not unique. I’m perfectly fine with having them in Halo simply because it’s not too outrageous to think that Spartans, whether from the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th Generation can run in power armor meant to enhance their natural abilities while feeling like a super durable second skin.

That, however, is simply my opinion. If you don’t like the mechanics, that’s fine, but I’m not opposed to them.

It honestly doesn’t matter to me how the game plays. If it’s a Halo game, I’m playing it.

> 2533274879757912;11:
> I think the biggest problem is that, because each popular brand has sort of chosen its path (Halo having the triforce of power balance, CoD/BF focusing more on ‘realistic’ combat styles (slide, clamber, grapple, rappel, etc), and well, whatever TF has going for it, I’m assuming a combo of BF and CoD?) initially, whenever any of them cross paths with a competitor, suddenly it’s a problem.
>
> Our belief is that; because a game started one way, it should never stray far from the origin. When it does, suddenly it’s trying to copy someone else.
>
> My personal opinion is that; we don’t get upset when newborns learn how to walk, claiming they’re ‘copying those who learned far before them’. Or when they learn a skill thousands if not millions learned beforehand. So why should we get upset when things like mechanics appear in later games? These things are simply just abilities we, the player, are granted. It allows us to maneuver and control the battlefield. Bungie was more interested in making something that was its own thing, and that’s fine, because at the time every developer was trying to figure out what they wanted their games to be like. Games wanted to stand out and be different, even if they had the same developer.
>
> 343i wants a more realistic take on Halo, they want to make it more realistically immersive. I’m perfectly ok with that, I love both the Bungie era and the 343i era games equally (with the exception to Guardians…). So many people get upset that Chief, Blue Team, every Spartan-IV can suddenly just clamber over things and run across the battlefield. They’re super soldiers in armor that enhances their normal abilities, to me, that just makes sense. Like, you tell me these are Humanity’s greatest protectors and yet they can’t mantle over things? They can’t do more than a power walk (which, granted, is faster than a normal human, but still)? Simple mechanics that just became available seem like they should have been there from the start lore wise (I haven’t read the books, so they probably have been).
>
> TL;DR: I’m not sure why simple mechanics like sprinting, clambering, etc are deemed ‘CoD abilities’ simply because CoD is one of the most popular series to incorporate those things over time. They can’t lay claim to a mechanic unless it’s unique, sprinting and climbing are not unique. I’m perfectly fine with having them in Halo simply because it’s not too outrageous to think that Spartans, whether from the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th Generation can run in power armor meant to enhance their natural abilities while feeling like a super durable second skin.
>
> That, however, is simply my opinion. If you don’t like the mechanics, that’s fine, but I’m not opposed to them.

You’re right, CoD wasn’t the first to have those mechanics. Rainbow Six was the first modern first person shooter, but it didn’t have sprinting and mantling.

It would be nice to have classic gameplay, but I’m not going to hold my breath on that one. If sprinting or other abilities are in the game, I hope they are the way Halo 5 had them instead of selectable loud outs like in Reach and 4.

> 2533274794684102;14:
> It would be nice to have classic gameplay, but I’m not going to hold my breath on that one. If sprinting or other abilities are in the game, I hope they are the way Halo 5 had them instead of selectable loud outs like in Reach and 4.

Reach’s loadout system is more like a armor ability selector.

> 2535435425251123;15:
> > 2533274794684102;14:
> > It would be nice to have classic gameplay, but I’m not going to hold my breath on that one. If sprinting or other abilities are in the game, I hope they are the way Halo 5 had them instead of selectable loud outs like in Reach and 4.
>
> Reach’s loadout system is more like a armor ability selector.

Exactly. If there are any armor abilities, everyone should always have them at all times

343 could follow the Doom 4 path where id made the new Doom an old-school shooter, and people loved it. If Doom could do it, why not Halo?

Im indifferent whether sprint is in the game or not, but if it is the maps need to be scaled to size otherwise you get grenade spam and spawn camped like crazy (find this a lot in Halo 5 just because the maps are to small for the movement imo). I would like a multiplayer that more so resembles Halo 3 though due to it being the most balanced and fun multiplayer in my opinion.

> 2535435425251123;17:
> 343 should follow the Doom 4 path where id made the new Doom an old-school shooter, and people loved it. If Doom could do it, why not Halo?

Simply put, because Halo isn’t Doom - what works for one thing, doesn’t mean it will work equall work on something different.
Besides that, why should H:I be simple copy of something else instead of being something unique?

> 2533274886490718;19:
> > 2535435425251123;17:
> > 343 should follow the Doom 4 path where id made the new Doom an old-school shooter, and people loved it. If Doom could do it, why not Halo?
>
> Simply put, because Halo isn’t Doom - what works for one thing, doesn’t mean it will work equall work on something different.
> Besides that, why should H:I be simple copy of something else instead of being something unique?

I changed should to could.

I mean that Halo Infinite can be old-school like CE. I don’t mean that it should copy Doom.