> 2535471109694535;4257:
> And in case you haven’t noticed, this whole thread has talked about going back to halo 3 and referring to how the game should return to it.
That’s not even close to the argument being made here and if you think it is, it’s no wonder your contributions continue to be completely useless. People bring up Halo 3 because it was the last major game in the series that still played like Halo at launch (I’m not counting ZBNS Reach) and it was the most successful (not necessarily the best) game in the series by a respectable margin. That doesn’t mean we want Halo 6 to be a carbon copy of Halo 3. Halo 3 wasn’t perfect. What we want is a NEW Halo game that iterates on the formula without blatantly undermining fundamental elements of the core gameplay mechanics and aesthetics. What we want is a step UP from Halo 3, instead of a step down and at an angle towards Call of Duty.
But even assuming we DID want that, so what? What is wrong with that, especially at this point? It’s been almost 10 years since the last game in this series that really stuck to its guns in terms of series identity and 343 is a NEW company that was tasked with shepherding a hugely successful and beloved franchise. It wasn’t their job to “innovate” it into the ground. It wasn’t their job to make it something different. Their job was to make a HALO GAME and the fact that they thought they could go on some “innovative” (i.e. derivative) tangent with the formula before they had even demonstrated that they had any clue why it worked suggests no shortage of hubris on their part. And they still haven’t fully owned up to the mistake, while apologists on places like Waypoint defend the idiotic decisions and pretend it hasn’t clearly failed.
Take an opposite example: Gears of War 4 by The Coalition. This game is very clearly a refined Gears of War 3 and they have gone out of their way to reassure fans to that effect. And why is that a good thing? Because they have explicitly said that their goal is to figure out exactly why the originals worked and refine the best parts from that trilogy in their SEQUEL. They aren’t trying to cram in big, game-changing mechanics to make a super modern, innovative “Super GoW of Duty.” They are demonstrating to the existing fan base that they understand the FOUNDATIONS of that formula and why it works. And I strongly suspect that part of the reason they are being so transparent about this is the utter failure that was H4, another sequel to a hugely successful Xbox series by a new company.
And continuing on this trend, just take a look at the hot, new modes in each respective game. Gears 4 introduces Dodgeball, a smart take on the unique approach that Gears takes with life pools in death match. It is a clever subversion of expectations that takes existing core elements and cleverly repurposes them into something intense and entertaining. And it plays on the same maps. It feels like Gears.
Halo 5 has Breakout, a game mode that hardly even resembles Halo, embraces none of the fundamental elements of formula, has a completely different, entirely shallow meta, and requires completely tailored made maps that are worthless for any other game mode because it is so completely dissimilar from even the bastardized Halo formula that Guardians features. At best, it’s poor man’s Counterstrike, but really, it’s just a bad paintball mode that 343 crammed into HCS. Breakout is a poster child of 343-style innovation. That they are making a Halo game is forever an after-thought and a limitation on their larger apparent goal of ripping off ideas from other games.
Warzone is the same thing. It eliminates traditional Halo notions of map control, it does away with power weapon and vehicle cycles, it simplifies map flow to 3 major points and bases, it puts your weapons in vending machines, it adds terrible PvE interactions courtesy of League of LEgends and DotA 2’s popularity. And why is that? Because MOBAs and Battlefield are successful and 343’s multiplayer designers are more interested in those trends than they are in expanding and improving what Halo offers.
So, in summation, while literally no one has suggested that the next Halo game needs to be Halo 3 2, why would that be a bad thing? Why would 343 demonstrating that they know how to make an actual Halo game be a problem? Halo 3 was hugely successful, culturally influential, and sustained a large, dedicated population for years. Every “modernized” Halo after it has done notably worse, but they shouldn’t look at what Halo 3 did right? lolwut?
