All explained in one video (I didn’t make the video btw)
Obviously the video is tipped in Bungie’s favor here due to the annotations by the guy who posted the video however I will not stop you from making your judgement as to who made Halo better.
Personally my opinion on the subject is that I don’t care who made the game in the first place. As long as I enjoy it and I have a good time, that is what matters to me most. As for my most favorite Halo multiplayer is Halo 5 and the only Halo’s I’ve ever got to play during their “prime time” was Halo 4 and Halo 5. HOWEVER my most favorite Halo I ever got to play was Halo Reach.
It was the game I enjoyed most due to its campaign especially as well as it’s customization and art style of the armor. Forge was clunky and hard to use but at least there was a file browser to try out maps people created and they were amazing.
However I should point out right here and now is that 343i and Bungie do their games differently. 343 wants their game to be more for the competitive audience and Bungie wants their game to be fun. IMO I honestly think 343 screwed up Halo due to prioritizing the competitive scenario 1st and the community 2nd. I mean they put Infection out 8 months after release, you would think after releasing the game and having only Warzone as the casual playlist you would prioritize community playlists first in order to keep the population going.
However I’m just a single person with his own opinion. No doubt people out there think that Competitive Halo is the right choice and I won’t stop you believing that. But the next time you are going to put in “Halo 6 needs to be like Halo 1/2/3…”, just remember that there is a new sheriff now, and they have their own way of doing things.
343’s focus on the competitive community is very much a result of halo 4’s backlash. Halo 4 was generally perceived as low skill, high RNG, and very much favoring casualness. Beyond the usual sprint debates there was much griping over how uncompetitive the game was. There were many threads that talked about “being competitive helps casuals too!”. 343’s reaction to this with h5’s early MP talk makes it pretty clear they listened, as they immediately started talking about even starts and other such things to reinforce they were focusing on competitive.
h4’s story was regarded mostly well by EU fans, but pretty negatively by those not versed in the EU. h4 was a very jarring transition from h3, and left many of the developements in the setting to the books and just kind of expected people to go along with it. The change in tone, scale, and setting simply as a result of the defeat of the covenant empire, and new enemies in the form of the promtheans, caused quite a bit of debate and division in both groups.
h5 is very much a reactionary game to h4’s criticism. I don’t think its so much they deeply desired to make a competitive game (see Warzone), but that they felt that was what the voice of the community wanted. For better or for worse, h5 is a product of trying to get right what people found wrong with h4.
*Return of focus on map pickups and control
*Focus on small maps (yes, small given sprint at least)
*continued balancing of variety of the sandbox, rather than focusing on a few weapons
*Chief talking less
*Cortana having clothes
*Good guy elites appearing
*Return of the Arbiter
*Removal of didact
*Revival of Cortana
*Despite claims by the non-EU people, much lower importance of EU than h4.
*Humanity under threat from a widespread threat, no longer being the giants
*Promethean enemies and weapons extensively overhauled
I’m not saying I agree or support many of these moves after h4, quite the opposite in a number of places, but many of the things were demanded or complained about after h4. I feel even Locke’s boringness is a reaction to people reacting to his more antagonistic early portrayals. The level balance is likely more of a result of time constraints and what made sense with the plot they settled on in the end.
Thank you, UrbaneRocket495, for being the voice of reason. It seems 343i is danged if they do, danged if they don’t with this community. I feel the only way they could actually make people happy is to rename themselves Bungie.
Which isn’t to say they’ve done everything right, but I do believe they’ve made some solidly fun Halo games.
As with topics like these in the past, we generally ask that users not make these types of comparison threads. Both companies have their faults and both have done some great things. Threads like these, despite best intentions, always end up devolving into developer bashing which isn’t something we want to promote here on the forums. Thanks