> I’m trying to be the most constructive I can, but after playing Halo 4 today, I realized I was playing more a COD than a real Halo game and that really piss me off.
I hate this. While H4 is definitely removed from the previous titles, it plays nothing like CoD. The two games are worlds apart. Were some CoD-like elements included that detract from the game? Absolutely. And I wish they weren’t. But when people begin a thread declaring H4 is CoD in space, it makes my head want to explode.
> They didn’t want to copy Bungie, but they tought it was a good idea to copy COD? Seriously?
Many of the objectionable items - while present in CoD - were not invented by CoD. CoD copied them from somewhere else . . . just as many elements not taken from CoD were still copied from somewhere else. For example:
- Crouch was introduced to FPSs by Star Wars: Dark Forces.
- Goldeneye brought reloading and headshots to console shooters.
- Half-Life introduced a spring-jumping concept.
- Primary / secondary weapon restrictions was popularized by Counterstrike.
- CTF was introduced to FPS multiplayer by Rise of the Triad and popularized by the later Quake mod.
- King of the Hill was brought to Halo by Bungie from its earlier Marathon series.
- Tribes brought jetpacks into FPS.
. . . and I really could go on and on. Many of the above - which are copied from other games - are fundamental to Halo gameplay. Simply because something is copied from somewhere else does not make it bad. And the statement that they copied more from CoD and less from Bungie is so backwards as to not merit further comment.
You then go on to ask for a bunch of stuff to be removed, most of which has no effect on gameplay, or is already removed (so why post about it???). No reason is given other than that they are copied from somewhere else. That is not a good reason - especially when many of the non-gameplay items are popular.
> Remember: copying what other franchises are doing is not evolving (or “moving forward” as many claim), it’s de-evolving. It turns our beloved franchise into another military shooter with perks and 1-second battles. This is Halo, remember that!
Except that most of what Halo was prior to H4 was copied directly from predecessor games.
Even the most “innovative” of games copy the vast majority of their concepts features from previous games. Every FPS after Wolfenstein has largely copied the previous games and only added a small number of improvements (though the improvements added may have greatly changed the way the game is played . . . like the ability to look up and down a la Heretic). Most of the adds were small in scale compared to what was copied, even if the feel of the game was entirely different. Innovation generally came in how all of the features were implemented to give the game a unique feel. This was true of CE. And of H2. And of H3.
With that said, H4 certainly copied things from other games that it should not have - like the killstreak reward concept (executed as PoD), sprint, and class customizations. Should those go away? Absolutely. But to chuck everything is to throw out the baby with the bath water.
Your post is based on a false premise, and all of the issues you bring up are dealt with elsewhere in more depth.
> > Weapon skins don’t work well because…?
>
> Because they are dependent on the existence of loadouts, which is also on the removal wishlist. I don’t see a game developer implementing weapon skins in a game with only map pickups. (Well, unless we’re counting Forerunner weapons as skins. lololololol)
H4 implemented them in conjunction with loadouts, but they certainly can be implemented without loadouts. In fact, weapon skins are the only aesthetic customization that was selectable in H4 via loadouts. Amor, emblems, stances, and tags were separately customizable.
I do not understand why you think a developer would not implement them with only map pickups. There is still no issue with customizing the appearance of the starting weapons (even if they are fewer in number).
