> This has no basis on the argument besides the fact that CoD consistently changes and cuts features and retains sales. Its not about what you prefer, its about what works.
OK but some CODs clearly work better than others, it’s not as if they are all equal or that each one is considerably better than the next. Cuts and changes matter, and the opinions centered around different CODs clearly shows this.
> Youre missing my point. I mentioned that Halo’s “core gameplay” is subjective. All Im trying to point out is how so many different Halo games have done away with some aspects that the community holds as “core gameplay”.
And I’m arguing that those changes were mostly bad and I would also argue that certain longstanding features have proved to be more successful than others.
> I dont also agree with the Golden Triangle as a concept, and apparently neither does Bungie, as they went ahead and made Destiny.
Well the vast majority of the Halo community seems to agree that the Golden Triangle is good, and Destiny wasn’t exactly as beloved or game changing as Halo now was it.
> I dont want to touch on this again, but sales and retained players as singular figures are meaningless without context. In my opinion, Halo’s success, both in retaining players and overall sales, had more to do with the lack of solid FPS competition and the sheer number of quality games available right now. Its all about how people wanted to spend their time.
Your absurd claim that Halo 3 had no competition has been thoroughly disproven, and it also fails to take into account that even huge fans of a franchise like Halo will still play other FPSs, I and pretty much everybody I knew played both Halo 3 and COD 4. I definitely went through phases where I played one more than the other, but I was a huge fan of both.
> In regards to Doom, yes I see that it can work, but the sales numbers show otherwise. If you want the Halo population to be like Doom’s, power to you. Id prefer it be larger. Ill say the numbers again. 2 million units on PC after 1 year, Halo 5 does 5 million in 3 months.
Oh my gosh, I do not want Halo’s sales to be lower, for the last time, I brough up Doom to show that a sprintless game can succeed even today and once again that 2 million number is only the total if you dishonestly ignore the total sales of Doom on all platforms. Doom had no multiplayer, and came from a franchise that hadn’t had a sequal for over a decade, so it’s no surprise that it didn’t attract as many people, but it’s gameplay was certainly appealing.
> Having the knife out does restrict your ability to use weapons
No it doesn’t, a knife is a weapon, it’s a weapon that gives you a speed boost when you hold it, but it doesn’t lock you in an animation, or keep you from using the weapon that you hold so it isn’t sprint.
> You can move through the map faster, but you cannot shoot back. Applies to both sprint and knife speed.
The only reason you can’t shoot is because it’s a knife, and knives can’t shoot. You know what else can’t shoot, a gravity hammer and an energy sword, and in Halo Reach, 4, and 5 you have to go into an animation to sprint with both of those weapons. An increase in base movement speed with a certain weapon and sprint are not the same.
> The part about the turret makes it seem like your being disingenuous, but I can give you benefit of the doubt.
It’s not disingenuous in any way, both Halo 3 and CS:GO have weapons which change your movement speed whilst letting you use them without going into an animation which stops you.
> Overwatch is not a traditional FPS. If you want to argue that people buy Overwatch to get their traditional shooter fix in the vein of Call of Duty and Battlefield, then I just happen to disagree with you. Unfortunately, there is no way to solve this argument. A hero shooter with MOBA roles doesnt sound like something someone sits down and considers when deciding what to buy between Call of Duty and Battlefield
That’s just your personal preference, WerepyreND already told you that he used it to get his FPS fix.
