I enjoy Reach. It’s not my favorite, but I like it. Do I think Halo 4 should feel more like Halo 3/2? Yes. Was Reach a bad game? No, it wasn’t. I understand that people were annoyed that AA’s ruined the game. I, myself, get pissed at Armor Lock on more than few occasions. However, I can’t help but get even angrier when I hear people -Yoinking!- and whining about how much they suck at Reach and how they feel innovation wasn’t necessary, and how it’s the worst in the series, or how Bungie lost 'touch-with-the-fans. Quit complaining. There won’t ever be a perfect game. Even Halo: CE was far from perfect with repetitive maps, awkward character animations, and quirky movement. Halo 2 was glitch ridden and broken. Halo 3 was sluggish and laggy. Halo 3: ODST … actually ODST was quite good … repetitive i suppose. Reach was too frustrating.
I see these problems in the games, yet I love them all. Because they each innovated on their predecessors. Unlike (what seems like 99% of the community), I want my Halo games to be different than the last, at least a little bit. I don’t want Halo 3.5 as Halo 4. I don’t want Halo to be what Call of Duty is infamous for being: rehashed. I want innovations, changes for the better, and, most importantly, I want Halo to be treated like the great game it is.
If I wanted to play Halo 3, Halo 2, or Halo CE, I’d play Halo 3, Halo 2, or Halo CE.