The Future of Halo, and Gaming

I don’t know about a lot of you, but the latest installment, Halo 4, was severely underwhelming. The gameplay was frustrating for me, and not at all the style I expected from a Halo game. I have seen people refer to halo 4 as Call of Crysis, and I quite agree. This is just me, but I know a lot of people who feel the same way about the game. But perhaps we are to blame…

I came across a video on youtube, and it nailed it. It talks about games that flopped and games that sold. The most successful games were the ones that stuck to…
well…

Just watch. I hope 343 is paying attention to this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q

If they can make a GOOD halo game, I would buy an xboner.

The essential ingredient for fan feedback is in the details – with constructive critisism.

It’s probably best to include the reasons (in detail) why Halo 4 doens’t live up to your expectations. That way we, as fans, can discuss the pros and cons, and 343i can look into those areas that you have raised as a concern.

Of course, as a developer, you’re never going to please everyone. The fiction fans will want more fiction; the multiplayer fans will want more of a challenge; and the Machinima fans will want better editing tools in Forge etc. But describing exactly what bothers you can go a long way in improving Halo.

> I don’t know about a lot of you, but the latest installment, Halo 4, was severely underwhelming. The gameplay was frustrating for me, and not at all the style I expected from a Halo game. I have seen people refer to halo 4 as Call of Crysis, and I quite agree. This is just me, but I know a lot of people who feel the same way about the game. But perhaps we are to blame…
>
> I came across a video on youtube, and it nailed it. It talks about games that flopped and games that sold. The most successful games were the ones that stuck to…
> well…
>
>
> Just watch. I hope 343 is paying attention to this.
>
> Game Theory: Are Gamers Killing Video Games? - YouTube
>
>
> <mark>If they can make a GOOD halo game, I would buy an xboner.</mark>

According to that video, you won’t! I’ve been a subscriber to his videos for a while.
I’m a bit torn … it’s the same with movies. People complain about these massive budget CG fests of pretty lights and violence and stunts but no substance … yet those movies sell.
I love a good art house flick (like “Nebraska”, for instance) but still get excited for an over-the-top, over polished, action hero space adventure thriller etc etc.
I buy every Halo and Assassin’s Creed for two reasons: The Story (very big part of both of those franchises) and I know what I’m getting because I’ve enjoyed the older ones. BUT I still have and play a lot of the more innovative titles for something new (your Portals, Bioshocks, & Mirror’s Edge respectively).
I like innovative games … but I also like the ones I’ve enjoyed in the past to be there, new and slightly improved so I can “ooh” & “ahh” over the new graphics and still have the same fun I did before.

I’m not saying that new is bad. I’m not saying innovation is inherently evil? But I am saying, do developers know the limits. Halo 4 released with on of the BEST Story telling techniques I have personally seen in a game so far. It was emotional, compelling, and had quite a bit of weight.
What I am complaining about is everything else. Call me a 3 junkie, but in my eyes, 3, while still a bit archaic and clunky in many aspects (aiming), was a far more fun and appreciable title than either reach or 4 when combining all elements.
Reach’s multiplayer was new and fun, and when I first got it I didn’t even want to touch 3, but when the play types got stale, it was back to 3.
Forge in both Reach and 4 IMO lacks in many ways, almost not being worth it for the improvements. I love map making, but I hate limitation. Certain Affinity has done a great job, but the game style and the way maps are played/build, including some of the key items that were left out that were in 3, make map making a bit stale after a while as well. While yes you can make an amazing speed halo or demo derby, you cannot make something like Omega Journey or Jenga. If they added Destructible objects, non static textures across items, and movable/interactable items, and a way to make infection the way YOU want it, would make my day. Take a good look at Omega Journey in Halo 3 on Foundry. If you build an engine that can make that, I’m sold. It opens more doors than just the 2 play types.
Is run really necessary? Are armor abilities REALLY necessary? It seems to me the developers are just adding things to make the skill factor less and less, like the video said. Adding Armor lock, makes noobs better. Jet pack, makes noobs better (sometimes). Running, makes you slightly harder to hit, increasing survivability, makes noobs better. What does this do to good players with an above average skill? They feel weaker. Their past glory of being awesome in previous games is getting buffered and stuffed with fluff. A little bit of skill advantage used to mean a lot. Now, not so much. I don’t mean pro either. I mean casual multiplayer.
The experience of Halo 4: Awesome
After 2 weeks when all the new feeling faded away and I became more familiar with it: Not so awesome. Felt a bit dry and washed down. My whole argument is, why keep changing the formula? Assassins creed has more or less stayed nearly the exact same give or take. You don’t hear about people complaining about it being the same game over and over. (Of course there is no competitive pro scene). You get Call of Duty (the buzz word) and everybody complains about it being the same, BUT LOOK AT THE SALES!
Same thing with halo. While there were differences, many, I argue that Halo: CE and Halo 3 are for all intents and purposes the same game style. Before you chew me up on that, what I mean is, they didn’t replace what worked with something that hasn’t been done with the core mechanics. Movement, Shields, shooting, pickups, vehicles all nearly the same. They weren’t trying to change it to make more people like it. They made what they wanted to, as much as MS would let them.

And why the crap is the cannon changing on a whim? (Reach) The Spartan II’s did not have different armor. They were manufactured at the last second in a war. Spartan III’s (aka fake spartans, they are supposed to have SPI armor, not modified MJOLNIR) and IV’s are the only ones that should have custom armor. The changeable armor was fun for multiplayer, but putting it in official story? Bull. And I don’t care what you say, Cortana is NOT a forerunner AI (Reach) She is an AI copied from Dr. Halsey’s brain. The only Smart AI.

I’m ranting here, but what I am trying to say is, in general, stop trying to conform with the popular thing, and go it at your own pace. Unnecessary innovation and adaptation can lead to disastrous results, such as Brink, MAG, and (Excuse my opinion here) Fable 2 and 3.

It comes down to, does the new game have the same fun strategy that the old games have (A developer talked about this in the making of halo 2 or 3), and is it fun for the same reason. If both answers are no, then you are sure to push many faithful consumers away really fast. You’ll get new consumers, but of a different community, and that pushes even more away.
And, please, 343, PLEASE, STOP, STAHP Putting custom forge world maps in regular playlists. Release a dang map pack, I WILL BUY IT to get rid of these crappy washed out wanna be real maps.

But that’s enough ranting. Excusing the minor errors of an enraged fanboy, what do you guys think?

And if anybody has played Armored Cores 1-4Answer, then played armored core V, you know what I mean.