Think of it this way...

Games Other Halo
22

> > I’m disgusted that you would call it anything other then a halo game. Halo 4 IS a halo game. Just like every other halo game that has been released.
> >
> > I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.
> >
> > As for multiplayer it changes over time. Every successful MP changes over the years. Battlefield changed from a very defined role per class to having more flexible classes that can do more then one job. Call of duty changed from having a very defined way to play or “how to correctly play” to a very open shooter that serves pretty much any style of play and allows those people to play on a competitive level their own way. I could give you more examples if needed.
> >
> > There are plenty of older players like I who have been around since the beginning and still enjoys todays MP. People are not wrong for not enjoying these new changes. But everyone keeps forgetting that NONE OF THIS IS NEW Every halo installment after CE has been hate bashed for its new elements. This happens in almost any multiplayer game that sticks around for a decade or more.
> >
> > I am NOT saying halo 4 has no issues. I am NOT saying peoples dislike is displaced. All i am saying is that this happens all the time. And believe it or not there are other reasons for the lack of population besides the changes. People have left because of them. But not only has that happened before but there is no way to prove its the biggest reason. Even if everyone who regulars the forums thought that way we are still a minority compared to the halo fanbase as a whole.
> >
> >
> > Your post has not only offended me as another halo fan but as a human being.
>
> I’d say its pretty obvious most left because of the changes. Unless you have a better reason?

Do you have any proof a majority left due to the changes?

23

> > I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.
> >
> > As for multiplayer it changes over time. Every successful MP changes over the years. Battlefield changed from a very defined role per class to having more flexible classes that can do more then one job. Call of duty changed from having a very defined way to play or “how to correctly play” to a very open shooter that serves pretty much any style of play and allows those people to play on a competitive level their own way. I could give you more examples if needed.
> >
> > There are plenty of older players like I who have been around since the beginning and still enjoys todays MP. People are not wrong for not enjoying these new changes. But everyone keeps forgetting that NONE OF THIS IS NEW Every halo installment after CE has been hate bashed for its new elements. This happens in almost any multiplayer game that sticks around for a decade or more.
>
> Multiplayer is what defines Halo. That’s fine if you are a big time campaign player, but most people play Halo for the multiplayer aspects.
>
> Comparing changes in Halo to changes in Call of Duty is ridiculous. Call of Duty has stuck to the same basic formula over the years, making small changes that don’t affect the core gameplay. That is why Call of Duty is the most popular game around. Halo has made drastic changes over the last two titles, changes that completely alter the basic gameplay and even change it from an arena shooter to a class based shooter. This is why Halo is no longer the most popular game on Xbox Live, currently sitting at #8 on the Xbox Live activity charts, a disgrace is there ever was one.
>
> You’re right that haters will always bash on the new Halo, happens every time, but this is different. When people were bashing on Halo 2 and Halo 3, those games were the best selling games on their consoles and were topping the Xbox Live activity charts, so they were still extremely popular. With Halo 4, the majority of the population has left Halo for other games because Halo no longer resembles the game they used to enjoy.

I’m not even going to argue this. What defines halo is the story. It’s what makes the universe and what comes first. I play more MP then campaign. Appearently you misunderstood what i meant.

Curious. How many cod games have you played and how much time have you put in each of them? If you are arguing that COD still feels the same because you still win based on who shoots first then that is correct. But call of duty has made very huge changes to the gameplay over it’s years. The most recent being the pick 10 system. I guess you people don’t understand anything. If you strip away POD custom loadouts etc at it’s very base halo 4 is halo.

You still frag people you still have to out strafe and land your 4 shots etc. But just like call of duty new elements are added to freshen the experience. Undeniable fact. No it’s not different. People complain about the new mechanics in every halo. The “difference” is the gaming market and it’s wants.

24

> > I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.
>
> Frankly, unless you happen to have a source at hand, I have to say multiplayer wasn’t something put into the game at the last minute. Bungie games have had competitive multiplayer since Marathon. All I ever remember them saying was that they didn’t expect the multiplayer to become the phenomenon it became, and that they had debates whether they would support 16 players because they didn’t expect people to plug their Xboxes together in LAN. But discrediting their effort at the multiplayer by saying it was just thrown in without much thought is wrong.
>
> The reality of it is that whether you want it or not, the multiplayer most likely constitutes a large majority of the play time put into the game. Halo has a reputation of a competitive multiplayer shooter, just like every first person shooter these days, and therefore most people will judge the game based on the multiplayer. Not out of any disrespect towards single player, but because the multiplayer simply has much more replay value.
>
> Nonetheless, it’s silly to say “______ defines Halo, and nothing else”. There are many things that define Halo, and some, if not most, are a matter of personal preference.
>
>
>
> > As for multiplayer it changes over time. Every successful MP changes over the years. Battlefield changed from a very defined role per class to having more flexible classes that can do more then one job. Call of duty changed from having a very defined way to play or “how to correctly play” to a very open shooter that serves pretty much any style of play and allows those people to play on a competitive level their own way. I could give you more examples if needed.
>
> Debatable. Counter Strike is still fairly succesful, still plays very much the same as ten years ago. Call of Duty has barely changed since it really became popular with Modern Warfare. Really, there are examples either way. It’s a matter of how the designer sees the game. If they have an emphasis on competitive play, the game won’t be changed because it’s defined by its rule set, and the rules need to stay consistent like in any competitive game. Nonetheless, success doesn’t demand drastic changes with every iteration.

Point 1) Perhaps i can re word what i meant. What i mean is the story defines the universe. The story comes first. That’s what i meant by the story defining what halo is. The multiplayer is important. But unless it’s an exclusive multiplayer only game the story is what defines what it is.

Point 2) “drastic” is also very debatable. The removal of the AR and added a precision primary is a drastic change from CE to 2. But to some people it’s just the removal of one gun. In the case of halo 4 Fully customizable loadouts feels like a natural progression and not a drastic change to me. But to others it makes all the difference. See my point?

25

I’m not sure what you are trying to say, sure, if we judged Halo 4 as something else and not a Halo game it may be much better.

Problem is that it’s a Halo game, why shouldn’t we judge Halo games as Halo games? It is only logical after all, yes, some aspects feel like Halo but others are just alien to the franchise.

26

> > I’m disgusted that you would call it anything other then a halo game. Halo 4 IS a halo game. Just like every other halo game that has been released.
>
>
> I never said that.
>
>
> > I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.
>
> Again, never said that. I prefer campaign actually. Please quote the part of my post where I said I prefer MP.
>
>
>
> > There are plenty of older players like I who have been around since the beginning and still enjoys todays MP. People are not wrong for not enjoying these new changes. But everyone keeps forgetting that NONE OF THIS IS NEW Every halo installment after CE has been hate bashed for its new elements. This happens in almost any multiplayer game that sticks around for a decade or more.
>
> Like others have said, the other games HAD populations. Again, I never said they were wrong.
>
>
>
> > I am NOT saying halo 4 has no issues. I am NOT saying peoples dislike is displaced. All i am saying is that this happens all the time. And believe it or not there are other reasons for the lack of population besides the changes. People have left because of them. But not only has that happened before but there is no way to prove its the biggest reason. Even if everyone who regulars the forums thought that way we are still a minority compared to the halo fanbase as a whole.
>
> And neither am I.
>
>
>
> > Your post has not only offended me as another halo fan but as a human being.
>
> Sorry for trying to bring about a better attitude around here.
>
> I’m not trying to undermine you, I’m just trying to have a healthy discussion. I’m trying to see your view on this, but your “putting words into other peoples’ mouths” strategy isn’t really helping.
>
> There was a reason I bolded/italicized/underlined this in the OP:
> Please keep the Halo 4 Forum as intelligent and clean as possible, and maybe its reputation among Waypoint forum-goers will improve.

I wasn’t “shoving words in your mouth.” My reactions were made based upon what your post implied when i read it. My response was polite constructive and detailed. I am much kinder then most people around here. I’m sorry if you felt like i was attacking you. I was simply telling you how i felt the best way possible without sounding like a total -Yoink-.

27

Nice post Zanzibar!

> I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.

  1. Gameplay is what defines Halo, story comes second
  2. 343i are treating Matchmaking as if it’s more important than Campaign. That’s just unacceptable
28

> I wasn’t “shoving words in your mouth.” My reactions were made based upon what your post implied when i read it. My response was polite constructive and detailed. I am much kinder then most people around here. I’m sorry if you felt like i was attacking you. I was simply telling you how i felt the best way possible without sounding like a total -Yoink!-.

I agree that you were polite and constructive apart from your last sentence in your first post, but I (and others) are still not sure how I offended you as a Halo player and a human being by simply posting a thread that wasn’t even aimed at you.

Also, would you mind listing the CoD major changes? I don’t play CoD, and I’m kind of sick of bashing it based on a few playing experiences. Maybe that will help me to either bash it more for an actual reason or bash it less due to my new-found knowledge.

@Sliding Ghost-Thanks!

29

> Nice post Zanzibar!
>
>
>
> > I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.
>
> <mark>1. Gameplay is what defines Halo, story comes second</mark>
> 2. 343i are treating Matchmaking as if it’s more important than Campaign. That’s just unacceptable

Depends, I’m willing to play a game with awful gameplay as long as it has a good story, a game can have great gameplay but if the story is bad, I won’t play it, I know plenty of people who are into the extended fiction, I’d say most of the Halo stuff outside of the games is for developing the story

Agree 110% with point 2, Bungie are also guilty

30

> > Nice post Zanzibar!
> >
> >
> >
> > > I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.
> >
> > <mark>1. Gameplay is what defines Halo, story comes second</mark>
> > 2. 343i are treating Matchmaking as if it’s more important than Campaign. That’s just unacceptable
>
> Depends, I’m willing to play a game with awful gameplay as long as it has a good story, a game can have great gameplay but if the story is bad, I won’t play it, I know plenty of people who are into the extended fiction, I’d say most of the Halo stuff outside of the games is for developing the story
>
> Agree 110% with point 2, Bungie are also guilty

Yeah, I think for a game to be successful at all (community-wise) it needs both gameplay and story.

31

> > > Nice post Zanzibar!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > I also find it rather gut wrenching that a games multiplayer determines it’s status of itself. The story is what defines halo and nothing else. The multiplayer was a side project that was put in at the last minute and happened to come out a success. To you halo might all be about MP and that’s fine. But don’t go around acting like that is a legit fact. That is your preference and nothing more.
> > >
> > > <mark>1. Gameplay is what defines Halo, story comes second</mark>
> > > 2. 343i are treating Matchmaking as if it’s more important than Campaign. That’s just unacceptable
> >
> > Depends, I’m willing to play a game with awful gameplay as long as it has a good story, a game can have great gameplay but if the story is bad, I won’t play it, I know plenty of people who are into the extended fiction, I’d say most of the Halo stuff outside of the games is for developing the story
> >
> > Agree 110% with point 2, Bungie are also guilty
>
> Yeah, I think for a game to be successful at all (community-wise) it needs both gameplay and story.

Gameplay is definitely a large element, but it depends from person to person

32

A game is made up of its single player, multiplayer, and its connection to the rest of its fiction if applicable. For someone to say that X is “the defining characteristic” of a franchise or game is incredibly ignorant. Perhaps that part is more important to you personally, but that doesn’t mean that it “defines” the entire franchise.

If you consider the Universe the most important part of Halo, cool. But that’s an opinion, not a fact. For the vast majority of the Halo fanbase, multiplayer is the most important part of Halo. Those people are not “wrong.” It isn’t “false” to enjoy a game’s multiplayer gameplay more than its Campaign, story, or universe.

Halo: CE through 3 all felt and played a certain way (even Reach, but not as much), and Halo 4 lacks that feeling. Of course its long-time fans are upset. Don’t you think that if I wanted to play a class-based shooter crossover, I wouldn’t have been playing Halo for the past twelve years? Unless you completely strip out everything in Halo 4 that 343i added, it doesn’t even feel at all like previous Halo games. And true, you can do that, but there’s so little support for “basic”/“classic”/“Legendary” multiplayer in Halo 4 that it is very lacking in replay value.

So what if Halo: CE’s multiplayer was a happy accident? That doesn’t change that it was the multiplayer that kept it popular among the majority of its fanbase for years, even after Halo 2’s release. And at E3 2004, Bungie had a playable multiplayer demo. The CE multiplayer may have been an accident, but Bungie obviously spent a lot of time working on the multiplayer for 2, 3, and Reach.

33

You always have to be careful when judging a game by professional critics.

Do these critics know what makes a fun game? Yes.
Do they know what makes a good competitive multiplayer shooter? Not at all.

34

Halo 4 isn’t a bad game, its just not a good Halo game.

35

Nostalgia is a helluva drug. Nothing will beat CE LAN parties for me. Younger players don’t seem to understand that, sometimes, it’s not the game that changes… it’s you.

36

> Depends, I’m willing to play a game with awful gameplay as long as it has a good story, a game can have great gameplay but if the story is bad, I won’t play it, I know plenty of people who are into the extended fiction, I’d say most of the Halo stuff outside of the games is for developing the story
>
> Agree 110% with point 2, Bungie are also guilty

A game shouldn’t have to sacrifice story for gameplay or vice versa.

37

> > I wasn’t “shoving words in your mouth.” My reactions were made based upon what your post implied when i read it. My response was polite constructive and detailed. I am much kinder then most people around here. I’m sorry if you felt like i was attacking you. I was simply telling you how i felt the best way possible without sounding like a total -Yoink!-.
>
> I agree that you were polite and constructive apart from your last sentence in your first post, but I (and others) are still not sure how I offended you as a Halo player and a human being by simply posting a thread that wasn’t even aimed at you.
>
> Also, would you mind listing the CoD major changes? I don’t play CoD, and I’m kind of sick of bashing it based on a few playing experiences. Maybe that will help me to either bash it more for an actual reason or bash it less due to my new-found knowledge.
>
> @Sliding Ghost-Thanks!

I’ve been with COD since cod 4. Now i can’t quite tell you the changes that impacted cod 4 and WAW as it’s been a long time. But i can fill you in on the others. A few really big things that impacted gameplay were: the removal of stopping power, a kill streak that told you the exact location and direction of every enemy constantly for 45 seconds, Strike packages helped players define their roles on a team better, Splitting up perks so instead of having multiple abilities per perk it only has one ability, Removal of last stand/final stand, A nerf to cold blooded/ghost, the pick 10 system, customizable killstreaks.

Those are what i can pull off the top of my head. To sum up what these changes did was creating less of a “proper loadout” and allowing for players to make their own playstyle without being gimmped for doing so. We see this being furthered in call of duty ghosts. While on paper these editions might seem small they make a difference in how some things play out. But on the surface COD still feels the same because of it’s continued ease of use.

That is more or less how i feel about halo 4 and any halo past CE. New additions and mechanics that may make differences here and there but at the core it still plays like halo.

38

> Halo 4 was pretty well received with critics. 89 on Metacritic is good, even if it’s not up to Halo standards. I think that the reason that fans are so disappointed with Halo 4 is because they are judging it as a Halo game. If you look at Halo 4 and judge it as an Arena Shooter, then you’ll come out disappointed. If you look at it as an Arena/Class Crossover Shooter, than it’s not that bad.
>
> Granted, I don’t play Halo 4 anymore because I don’t really enjoy the MP, but I think if people look at it from a different view, then they might enjoy it more.
>
> There are tons of problems like balance and map design, but a new perspective might do a lot for this section of the forum.
>
> Please keep the Halo 4 Forum as intelligent and clean as possible, and maybe its reputation among Waypoint forum-goers will improve.

Yes, we judged it as a Halo game. When you attach a brand to something, that isn’t an arbitrary label, there is baggage which comes along with it. I wouldn’t have preordered, and waited outside from 8pm until past midnight in order to an average Arena Shooter, I did it because it was Halo.

I bought Halo 4 because I liked what HALO was about, I enjoyed other HALO games. So when I saw a game “Halo 4” that carries certain expectations which it, as any brand does (Which is the point of a brand, so that your customers can immediately recognize what you’re about). Call me crazy but I bought HALO 4 because I enjoyed HALO and wanted to play more HALO. If I wanted to play CoD, I could’ve went and done that instead.

If I went to go see Lord of the Rings, and they changed what LOTR fundamentally is, what it is at the core, in order to appeal to a wider audience, I’d be upset.

When you spend the better part of a decade establishing the Halo brand, and then change core aspects of it, yeah people are going to be upset. I’m sure it was a calculated risk by 343, but it was one which hasn’t paid off. A map pack was just released, and there is the still the tournament, but the numbers are still low.

You don’t get to slap the Halo label on a game, and then cry “Why is everybody judging our game as a Halo game? If you judged it by a lower standard it would look better!”. Halo isn’t a small budget game, the budget is massive. Smaller companies could get away with releasing “Call of Duty clone 4” because we expect less from them.

If you’re going to work with one of the best gaming franchises, you have to man up and accept the fact that you’re going to be held to a higher standard. When you fail (Like 343 did), learn from your mistakes and strive to improve (Which thankfully 343 appears to be doing).

Even a flaming bag of dog feces looks appealing if you hold it to a low standard. It isn’t the consumers’ job to hold companies to a lower standard, it is the company’s job to meet and exceed expectations.

Also while I left BWO because I couldn’t stand them, and RazrStorm has personally disagreed with me in the past, he’s one of the better people here on these forums. If he makes a claim, there is usually something valid behind it.

39

I heard someone say: “Halo 4 is a great game, not a great halo”. I think that that sums up halo 4 perfectly

40

> Can you prove a majority of people left due to changes?

There are many things that you can’t disprove, such as the existence of Santa or the Tooth Fairy.

But that in itself isn’t a very convincing argument if you want to argue that it is a believable possibility that it wasn’t due to the changes.

It’s a possibility, but it isn’t a believable one.

Due to the information we have available to us, such as the game selling in HUGE numbers, but losing a substantial amount of players after launch, the most obvious possibility is that people who previously liked Halo (we can assume, due to the fact that they bought the game) didn’t like Halo 4.
This would lead us to believe that it was the drastic changes in gameplay that turned them away.

So we can’t prove that the gameplay changes are the main reason, but that doesn’t give much credibility to the idea that they weren’t.

It’s quite safe to assume that it was the changes with Halo 4’s gameplay that turned players away, but you are quite free to believe otherwise of course.