To make Halo a game that everyone loves,

It needs to be Competitive. Yes this is a Competitive thread. No I’m not trying to keep you from having fun in Halo 4. Yes, you should probably read the whole thing before posting (but that won’t stop you, you already stopped reading at the word “Competitive”).

Before I begin, I’d like to make sure that we’re all on the same page here.

Most (if not all) of us loved Halo’s 2-3. Correct?

Most of us hated (or at least didn’t like as much) Halo: Reach. Correct? (Yes, I know there is a portion of the community that likes Reach, but most of us don’t.)

Now looking at these forums, I am at a loss for words as to how short the community’s collective memory is.

Halo 2-3 were without a doubt Competitive games. They had everything the Competitive player could want. A solid, skill-based ranking system (and a visible one at that), a good amount of small, Competitive maps, fast-paced gameplay, a balanced sandbox (minus the Halo 3 BR), and gimmicks that didn’t affect balance.

But did all of that mean that those games could not be played, much less loved, by the casual community? No.

Look at Halo 2. It had arguably the best maps in the history of gaming, including a plethora of AMAZING BTB maps, a bunch of fun gametypes (Infection, Tower of Power), etc.

Look at Halo 3. It had some great maps (including more good BTB maps), it introduced new “casual” gametypes and modes (Grifball, Forge) that spawned their own communities, etc. What’s not to love?

As for the “Competitive” ranking system, if you didn’t want to play it, you didn’t have to. As for the “Competitive” maps, most of them (Lockout, Midship, Sanctuary, Ivory Tower, Guardian, The Pit, etc.) were loved just as much by the “Casuals” as they were the “Competitives”. As for the fast-paced gameplay and balanced sandbox, everyone likes that.

And these games were not without their own problems. Halo 2 had tons of glitches and exploits. Halo 3 had an incredibly OP BR. But did that mean that they weren’t fun for any part of the community (besides the CE purists)? Once again, no.

This is because of the fact that a a Competitive game, with the right tools, can be just as much fun for the average “Casual” gamer as the average “Competitive” gamer.

Look throughout gaming history and find an exception to this rule. There isn’t.

Halo: Reach on the other hand, was a primarily “Casual” game. Even the biggest Reach-lover couldn’t deny this.

Reach had a horrible, non-skill based, progression ranking system, one good small, competitive map (Zealot) and a bunch of awful, boring maps, the slowest paced gameplay in Halo history, a broken sandbox that completely lacked balance, and gimmicks that changed gameplay.

Well if you didn’t care about your rank, you wouldn’t care about the awful progression system. If you liked poorly designed maps and didn’t care about silly ideas like “Map movement,” then you wouldn’t care about the maps. If you didn’t care about gameplay speed, balance or the Golden triangle you wouldn’t care about anything else.

But if you cared about any of these things, if you had a “Competitive” attitude about any of this, you wouldn’t like that aspect of the game. If you wanted to play in a Competitive ranking system, you had to go to the -Yoink- Arena. If you wanted to play on a Competitive map, you had to pray that Sword Base/Countdown/[insert -Yoink- map here] didn’t come up, as that always would get picked. If you wanted fast-paced gameplay, weapon balance, or gimmicks that didn’t affect gameplay, you were screwed.

Why? Because almost every Reach, COD, Battlefield, or other Casual game cannot be loved by most Competitive gamers

Granted, Reach is an extreme case as it was an overall poorly designed game, but it is the most relative game to Halo 4 that we know of.

Why then, with many of Reach’s failures being carried over into Halo 4, a large portion of the community is cheering them on, I don’t know. If you guys don’t remember, a lot of people didn’t like Reach for things like AA’s and Loadouts. A lot of people DID like the original trilogy because of the fact that it was so simple and Competitive, yet the Casual player could still find fun in it.

This all means one thing: a “Competitive” game will draw the community together and be a fun game for everyone, as opposed to a “Casual” game that will split the community apart and neglect a large portion of the fanbase.

Now I know what you’re thinking “But COD sells millions of copies and it’s a Casual game!”
And Halo 2-3 sold millions of copies and were on top of XBL for 5 years and in 2nd for 1 more and were overall, Competitive games.

“But the gaming market has evolved!”
It has (unfortunately). And I never said things couldn’t be added to keep Halo afloat. BUT, these changes need to NOT affect gameplay. I’ll use Halo: Reach’s implementation of Sprint compared to Halo 4’s (which I actually don’t mind) as an example. Giving every player the same ability will most likely solve many problems such as map design. Now they know enough to add the “stop” mechanic to prevent escapes, which will keep gameplay from slowing down.
Overall, it is an unneeded mechanic, but it in its’ current implementation isn’t really doing anything to the gameplay.

“But there are more Casual players than Competitives! Why do you expect them to cater to you?”
Because, like I pointed out earlier, a well-designed Casual game will turn away most Competitives, a well-designed Competitive game will turn away virtually no one. Why turn away a portion of your community if you don’t have to?
Either way the Casual player wins in this case. If the game is Casual, the Casual players will like it. If the game is Competitive, the Casual AND Competitive players will like it.

In conclusion, I do not know why some people are so opposed to the thought of Halo 4 being a “Competitive” game. They might actually like it better if it was. I know I would.

Halo 4, as it is now, is probably going to be a game that most “Competitive” gamers will not be able to play for more than a few games, but it didn’t have to be. It could’ve been a game that everyone could’ve loved and everyone could’ve played.

And I realize that there are more than just “Casual” and “Competitive”, and not every “Casual” or “Competitive” player fits the stereotype given to them, I’m just generalizing.

tl;dr Halo 4 would be more fun for everyone if it was Competitive. I do please urge you to read the whole thing, its shorter than it looks and it is very informative.

> Most (if not all) of us loved Halo’s 2-3. Correct?
>
> Most of us hated (or at least didn’t like as much) Halo: Reach. Correct? (Yes, I know there is a portion of the community that likes Reach, but most of us don’t.)

Statistics! Right out of your rear!

> > Most (if not all) of us loved Halo’s 2-3. Correct?
> >
> > Most of us hated (or at least didn’t like as much) Halo: Reach. Correct? (Yes, I know there is a portion of the community that likes Reach, but most of us don’t.)
>
> Statistics! Right out of your rear!

Oh yeah, I forgot that everyone hated Halo 2-3, so they bought Halo: Reach and loved it and didn’t -Yoink- on the Bnet forums about every single aspect of the game.

> > > Most (if not all) of us loved Halo’s 2-3. Correct?
> > >
> > > Most of us hated (or at least didn’t like as much) Halo: Reach. Correct? (Yes, I know there is a portion of the community that likes Reach, but most of us don’t.)
> >
> > Statistics! Right out of your rear!
>
> Oh yeah, I forgot that everyone hated Halo 2-3, so they bought Halo: Reach and loved it and didn’t -Yoink!- on the Bnet forums about every single aspect of the game.

Apparently you weren’t around the forums when Halo 2, 3 and ODST was released.

> > > > Most (if not all) of us loved Halo’s 2-3. Correct?
> > > >
> > > > Most of us hated (or at least didn’t like as much) Halo: Reach. Correct? (Yes, I know there is a portion of the community that likes Reach, but most of us don’t.)
> > >
> > > Statistics! Right out of your rear!
> >
> > Oh yeah, I forgot that everyone hated Halo 2-3, so they bought Halo: Reach and loved it and didn’t -Yoink!- on the Bnet forums about every single aspect of the game.
>
> Apparently you weren’t around the forums when Halo 2, 3 and ODST was released.

Yes I was, and the complaints about those games were nothing compared to Reach.

Almost EVERYONE had something they didn’t like about Reach, while Halo 2-3 had millions of players 2 years into its’ life cycle.

And really? ODST? I thought we had established that it wasn’t a full game already.

> > > Most (if not all) of us loved Halo’s 2-3. Correct?
> > >
> > > Most of us hated (or at least didn’t like as much) Halo: Reach. Correct? (Yes, I know there is a portion of the community that likes Reach, but most of us don’t.)
> >
> > Statistics! Right out of your rear!
>
> Oh yeah, I forgot that everyone hated Halo 2-3, so they bought Halo: Reach and loved it and didn’t -Yoink!- on the Bnet forums about every single aspect of the game.

Yeah and of course nobody hated Halo 2 and now say it’s the best game ever…

Please, past Halo games got as much or even more hate than Halo Reach, don’t think you can talk for everyone.

And we have had enough of these threads, thousands of them, I’m really getting sick of it.

> > > > Most (if not all) of us loved Halo’s 2-3. Correct?
> > > >
> > > > Most of us hated (or at least didn’t like as much) Halo: Reach. Correct? (Yes, I know there is a portion of the community that likes Reach, but most of us don’t.)
> > >
> > > Statistics! Right out of your rear!
> >
> > Oh yeah, I forgot that everyone hated Halo 2-3, so they bought Halo: Reach and loved it and didn’t -Yoink!- on the Bnet forums about every single aspect of the game.
>
> Yeah and of course nobody hated Halo 2 and now say it’s the best game ever…
>
> Please, past Halo games got as much or even more hate than Halo Reach, don’t think you can talk for everyone.
>
> And we have had enough of these threads, thousands of them, I’m really getting sick of it.

If you think that more people didn’t like Halo 2 then Reach, you may be a little slow.

And maybe we have so many threads on this because it is an important issue. Ignoring a whole section of your fanbase shouldn’t be taken lightly. Or maybe you should just read the whole thread before you post.

Sorry a game that “everyone love” just can’t exist. Every games/film/music/(…) has it’s own detractor and people who were fan or whatnot and now hate it. If you don’t like Halo 4 it’s not my problem.

> Sorry a game that “everyone love” just can’t exist. Every games/film/music/(…) has it’s own detractor and people who were fan or whatnot and now hate it. If you don’t like Halo 4 it’s not my problem.

I meant every community. That, unfortunately, doesn’t sound as nice, nor does it fit in the title.

Agree with your points. The game needs to be catered to the casual and competitive communities equally. Reach screwed that up: only 2 competitive playlists, 1 is MLG which has no ranking and lacks variety, 2 is Arena which has poor ranking, poor maps and poor settings. So far [SO FAR, BASED OFF CURRENT OBSERVATIONS] there is evidence that says Halo is catered to the casual side far more. These presumptions can all be ever so easily fixed with 343i announcing how their ranking system works, and whether they will have classic settings/noloadoutsetc. playlists, but no lets just announce that we have the option to see through walls.

Honestly, more customizable in terms of game mechanics and functions.

That way, 343 can do their thing, MLG can do their thing, and everyone else can make up cool stuff in their own circle of friends.

You practically fixed everything by allowing a person have their vision come to life. However, it’s easier said then done.

> Agree with your points. The game needs to be catered to the casual and competitive communities equally. Reach screwed that up: only 2 competitive playlists, 1 is MLG which has no ranking and lacks variety, 2 is Arena which has poor ranking, poor maps and poor settings. So far [SO FAR, BASED OFF CURRENT OBSERVATIONS] there is evidence that says Halo is catered to the casual side far more. These presumptions can all be ever so easily fixed with 343i announcing how their ranking system works, and whether they will have classic settings/noloadoutsetc. playlists, but no lets just announce that we have the option to see through walls.

I still can’t name one thing that has been announced thus far that has been implemented specifically for the Competitive community. I can think of plenty for the Casual.

And its not like it would take much to make Halo 4 more Competitive. A few good, small maps, a good ranking system, a balanced sandbox, and gimmicks that don’t affect gameplay (at least in some playlists).

> Honestly, more customizable in terms of game mechanics and functions.
>
> That way, 343 can do their thing, MLG can do their thing, and everyone else can make up cool stuff in their own circle of friends.
>
> You practically fixed everything by allowing a person have their vision come to life. However, it’s easier said then done.

343 would need to start by recognizing that there IS a large Competitive Community to implement proper customization.

And sure it is. Have a good ranking system, good maps, and a balanced sandbox and everyone’s happy

didn’t get past "it has to be competitive. Added to the fact that yourpole is incredibly biased. If there is casuals and there are competitives making a game mostly wouldn’t make a halo game everyone loves. You can throw all the details you wish at me. The statement i made completley de-rails your whole OP.

Perhaps a better choice of words next time hm?

It’s not about customization. Reach had great customization, which lead to zero bloom gametypes and lots of settings which can be changed to be more competitive.

What Halo 4 needs are (MORE THAN TWO) competitive playlists right from the start. Also, should Halo 4 receive a TU, it needs to affect all playlists.

> didn’t get past "it has to be competitive. Added to the fact that yourpole is incredibly biased. If there is casuals and there are competitives making a game mostly wouldn’t make a halo game everyone loves. You can throw all the details you wish at me. The statement i made completley de-rails your whole OP.
>
> Perhaps a better choice of words next time hm?

Okay, cool you nitpick and tl;dr after you disagree with someone’s opinion.

The game doesn’t have to be 100% competitive, it needs to be 50/50 for both communities.

> didn’t get past "it has to be competitive. Added to the fact that yourpole is incredibly biased. If there is casuals and there are competitives making a game mostly wouldn’t make a halo game everyone loves. You can throw all the details you wish at me. The statement i made completley de-rails your whole OP.
>
> Perhaps a better choice of words next time hm?

This isn’t even coherent. Maybe I just can’t read, but I legitimately can’t tell what you’re trying to say.

> > didn’t get past "it has to be competitive. Added to the fact that yourpole is incredibly biased. If there is casuals and there are competitives making a game mostly wouldn’t make a halo game everyone loves. You can throw all the details you wish at me. The statement i made completley de-rails your whole OP.
> >
> > Perhaps a better choice of words next time hm?
>
> Okay, cool you nitpick and tl;dr after you disagree with someone’s opinion.
>
> The game doesn’t have to be 100% competitive, it needs to be 50/50 for both communities.

Uh yeah? But his post was what should the game be more casual or more competitive.

> didn’t get past "it has to be competitive. Added to the fact that yourpole is incredibly biased. If there is casuals and there are competitives making a game mostly wouldn’t make a halo game everyone loves. You can throw all the details you wish at me. The statement i made completley de-rails your whole OP.
>
> Perhaps a better choice of words next time hm?

Perhaps you should try a better choice of words, I can barely understand what the -Yoink- you are trying to say.

And a Competitive game WILL be loved by Competitives AND Casuals, while a Casual game will be loved by Casuals and hated by Competitives.

If you actually read my OP, you’d know this as I give specific examples and explanations, from Halo, as to why this is.

> > didn’t get past “it has to be competitive.” Added to the fact that your pole is incredibly biased. If there is casuals and there are competitives making a game mostly competitive wouldn’t make a halo game everyone loves. You can throw all the details you wish at me. The statement i made completley de-rails your whole OP.
> >
> > Perhaps a better choice of words next time hm?
>
> This isn’t even coherent. Maybe I just can’t read, but I legitimately can’t tell what you’re trying to say.

fixed your quote on my post. it is 6am And i have had zero sleep. Hopefully you can read it better now.