The "Halo is turning into CoD" fallacy

Games Other Halo
1

I’ve been thinking a little bit about this today, about the argument “Halo is turning into CoD”, and I’ve come up with some things that maybe not all will agree with, but it’s something that I’m sure a few of you will chuckle at.

I wanna start by saying that I haven’t bought a Call of Duty since MW2. I enjoyed CoD4 and MW2, but after that I decided not to buy any. I haven’t noticed a giant leap in technology or a big enough change to warrant a buy. There are little changes here and there, but the main reason I don’t buy Call of Duty anymore is because it doesn’t change.

I find the game mechanics fun. The game is fun when I do play it. Black Ops and MW3 are fun (my little brother whom I don’t live with has Black Ops and MW3). But I still wouldn’t buy them because I don’t see the difference between them and the previous iterations.

Now onto the fallacy of “Halo is turning into CoD”. A lot of players curse Halo for turning into CoD. They hate the changes, they hate all these similar features. They want the same old game year after year. They want their classic Halo 3 or Halo 2 game back. Does anyone else see the glaring hypocrisy in this? Maybe it’s just me, but, really…

Maybe I’m the only one who won’t buy CoD because it’s a rehash every year. Maybe some other players actually hate CoD because of the mechanics. Maybe some people just don’t like CoD at all.

But for those who won’t buy CoD because it’s a rehash, and then basically demand that Halo be a rehash are just plain hypocrites.

To demand a game stops changing, and evolving is idiotic to me. As long as these changes make the game better/funner, etc. I’m all for them. If they’re balanced, hurray, 343 has done their job well. If they went back, and gave us Halo 3’s multi-player with different maps. I would be seeing that as a step in the wrong direction. And if they did the same thing with Halo 5 and 6, never changing/evolving the game. I’d stop buying each iteration like I have with CoD.

Anyone agree? Disagree? Discuss your thoughts. Lets have a friendly debate/conversation, please no flaming.

2

Most people hate that it’s turning from an arena shooter to a class-based shooter. In my opinion it looks balanced enough for me to consider it an arena shooter with classes but that’s probably just me.

3

I love the new things and its not like cods the only game with things like weapon choosing or classes

4

It’s clearly not the same two groups of people doing the complaining…

5

I agree with you 100%! I love the way Halo 4 is looking. Even though its turning into a class-based shooter, it looks more balanced than any other Halo game.

6

It doesn’t matter to me what features they bring into Halo 4 (unless it’s something unnecessary like prone or ADS). If they’re balanced and they work well within the sandbox and don’t pervert the Halo core, then I’ll buy it and I’ll enjoy it. I’m not opposed to change unless it’s done poorly, which is why I was dissatisfied with Reach.

Halo 4 doesn’t look to do that. There are changes I love, changes I’m indifferent to, and some I don’t exactly like. But it’s still Halo and I’ll still play thousands of hours of it.

7

I saw a video, done by a guy named egoraptor, on YouTube that pretty much explained what you are talking about, even though he was comparing Megaman and Megaman X, the same could be applied here.

I’m pretty much the same with you with the CoD series. Its fun, but if I wanted to play MW2, I’d play MW2. Without changes, it doesn’t warrent enough for me to buy it. I’d rent it if I have the chance, bit not purchase it.

I can also understand how people can be frustrated with Reach’s features and how they didn’t work out well. Some of them I can agree with. However, it doesn’t translate into," Get this out!".

For those that want it, you can have classic settings in every way(CTF not included unfortunately). However, it shouldn’t prevent the game from evolving. The game itself was about taking Console FPS to the next level since the beginning and moving forward.

To me, I got bored.of.the previous games, though I did have fun while I played. To me, if Halo 5 or 6 became Halo 2/3/4 2.0, of get bored of them faster than I had with the original.

8

> It doesn’t matter to me what features they bring into Halo 4 (unless it’s something unnecessary like prone or ADS). If they’re balanced and they work well within the sandbox and don’t pervert the Halo core, then I’ll buy it and I’ll enjoy it. I’m not opposed to change unless it’s done poorly, which is why I was dissatisfied with Reach.
>
> Halo 4 doesn’t look to do that. There are changes I love, changes I’m indifferent to, and some I don’t exactly like. But it’s still Halo and I’ll still play thousands of hours of it.

I am much the same way agree 100%. I’m basically just calling out the people who don’t buy CoD because it’s a rehash, but then turn around and want Halo to be rehashed (to stop the evolution and change from happening).

9

Who says its the same people who criticize CoD for being the same, but then demand halo to be the same? Logic would dictate that it is two seperate groups. There are a lot of people that visit these forums and not every thread is a shared opinion between every member.

Futhermore, Halo staying the same from release to release like CoD stays the same from release to release, does NOT mean that halo is becoming like CoD. That is absurd.

10

> Most people hate that it’s turning from an arena shooter to a class-based shooter. In my opinion it looks balanced enough for me to consider it an arena shooter with classes but that’s probably just me.

Agreed.

11

Uhm, but it isn’t a fallacy. There are very specific things being implemented into Halo 4 that are clearly ‘taken’ from CoD. I’m not saying Halo shouldn’t evolve, I love that I can finally have a DMR/BR at spawn every game (and I happen to love Killcams), but you have to admit you can see how Halo 4 is implementing CoD elements. Halo may not be ‘turning into’ CoD exactly, but CoD’s influence is pretty apparent. Again, I don’t mean any of this is a negative way.

12

> It doesn’t matter to me what features they bring into Halo 4 (unless it’s something unnecessary like prone or ADS). If they’re balanced and they work well within the sandbox and don’t pervert the Halo core, then I’ll buy it and I’ll enjoy it. I’m not opposed to change unless it’s done poorly, which is why I was dissatisfied with Reach.
>
> Halo 4 doesn’t look to do that. There are changes I love, changes I’m indifferent to, and some I don’t exactly like. But it’s still Halo and I’ll still play thousands of hours of it.

Feel the same way

13

At this juncture I am a fan of both. For Halo I played all titles. For CoD, I only seriously played MW3 (which is considered as the most mediocre since MW2).

There is a fundamental difference between Halo and CoD that I feel the people in this forum failed to recognize, they have completely different focus:

Halo: the primary focus is Gun Play;
CoD: the primary focus is Encounter Control based on great situational awareness;

This is not to say that gun skill is completely useless in CoD, or encounter control and situational awareness are not needed in Halo. However, compared to the primary focus the other is much less critical.

Due to this, I completely disagree that "Halo is turning into CoD"

Although 343 are adding features popularized by CoD (note the word I use is “popularized”, not “invented”), they have been very careful in doing so in a way that

> They enhance a small part of the sandbox (meaning good players will still be good, and not good players will still be not good), allowing people to play the style they want to play and experience the parts of the sandbox they like on a more frequent basis.

As a result, Halo remains Halo and it is not in any danger of “turning into CoD”. A veteran CoD player who is noobish to Halo may find it a little bit easier to pick up H4 this time around, but he will struggle big time if he feels that he can play Halo like CoD. A vastly different skill set as well as mind set are needed to do well here.

I also strongly agree with OP on that Halo needs to change from time to time instead of simply rehashing itself. CoD has been on that path and fans have become more and more tired of it. Black Ops II is trying to challenge every assumptions in the existing formula and they are bringing in a few innovations as breadths of fresh air. Halo needs to do the same.

Finally, there is nothing wrong for either side to learn from the other. Take custom loadout for example: it is a nice addition to Halo for attracting the new FPS generations who grew up on CoD, without compromising Halo’s core experience.

People here should stop treating Halo vs. CoD as religions that a player has to choose one or the other. They are healthy competitions, and that’s great for all FPS fans.

14

> Uhm, but it isn’t a fallacy. There are very specific things being implemented into Halo 4 that are clearly ‘taken’ from CoD. I’m not saying Halo shouldn’t evolve, I love that I can finally have a DMR/BR at spawn every game (and I happen to love Killcams), but you have to admit you can see how Halo 4 is implementing CoD elements. Halo may not be ‘turning into’ CoD exactly, but CoD’s influence is pretty apparent. Again, I don’t mean any of this is a negative way.

I can clearly see things from CoD being implemented into Halo. But why is there such a stigma that comes with these mechanics? Why is there such a stigma with Call of Duty?

I’m sure most of us have played Call of Duty, and have had fun playing Call of Duty. I think the stigma associated with Call of Duty comes down to it being rehashed every damn year with little to no change.

This stigma then affects our view of Call of Duty mechanics, and associates them as terrible.

Many players want Halo to be rehashed, they want their classic Halo 3 or Halo 2 back. They contest every change that comes along. These players contest the Call of Duty-esque changes saying they don’t want Halo turning into CoD.

But if Halo were to be rehashed, if we were to get Halo 2 or 3 just with different maps, the same stigma that Call of Duty has, Halo would have too. That’s the fallacy. We hate Call of Duty because it’s rehashed, but then turn around and want Halo to be rehased. It makes no sense.

15

> Why is there such a stigma with Call of Duty?

Look at why CoD is popular. Every mechanic is used to cater to the broadest possible audience (we all know what this buzzword is code for).

It’s not that Halo is taking things from CoD, it’s not that Halo is no longer part of the diminishing “pure” Arena shooters. It’s because these changes don’t benefit Halo besides trying to cater to as large an audience as possible. This is exactly what happened to Battlefield 3 (and BC and BC2).

16

> > Why is there such a stigma with Call of Duty?
>
> Look at why CoD is popular. Every mechanic is used to cater to the broadest possible audience (we all know what this buzzword is code for).
>
> It’s not that Halo is taking things from CoD, it’s not that Halo is no longer part of the diminishing “pure” Arena shooters. It’s because these changes don’t benefit Halo besides trying to cater to as large an audience as possible. This is exactly what happened to Battlefield 3 (and BC and BC2).

Wait, what? Now you’re saying Call of Duty is for casuals? O__O I don’t understand…

Call of Duty barely changes from year to year. It stays to it’s core. Sure, there are THINGS that cater to casuals, but without these features your game just isn’t fun for new comers. Not everything in CoD caters to casuals. Not even a majority of things cater to casuals. And the fact that CoD stays to it’s core year after year, not evolving, isn’t that what competitive players want?

17

Spoiler

Halo isint evolving if its using mechanics and elements popularized in other FPS games from 2009.

18

okay, I’m going to get this out there before addressing the main topic: if you don’t like a game feature, become a games developer and design a game the way you want. simple(ish)

I like most of the changes HALO 4 has, my only major criticism is the grenade indicator and I don’t mind that to much. I’ll just ignore it and get blown up, oh well! nice throw!

I don’t see why people are calling this a CoD mimic, because most of the features CoD has that are now in HALO didn’t originate in CoD. CoD (like all games including HALO) has taken this-that-and-the-next from other games of its genera.

if HALO’s rival was any other FPS, any similarity to that game would be criticised in the same way similarities to CoD are currently criticised.

I don’t own a single cod game, but I’ve played Black Ops. guess what? it’s not bad, and the elements that I wanted gone (bare the grenade indicator) aren’t in HALO 4, so I’m not complaining. and how many of those complainers can honestly say they’ve played CoD and thus know what their talking about?

thank you.
good night.

19

I’m excited for Halo 4 as well, but you have to notice the similarities. Having the ability to call in a power-weapon after so many kills is very similar to a kill streak reward. Specializations are like watered-down perks, just to name a few. Obviously, these don’t mean that Halo is now all of a sudden just like COD, but these are vastly different from past Halo games and could be setting a bad precedent for future Halo titles. Will these ruin Halo 4? More than likely not, but you do have to notice similarities and why it’s troubling to some.

20

You know, all the time I hear people complaining about how Halo is copying CoD, Yet no one talks about how call of duty is copying Halo