This is directed at the old school halo players that do not like halo 4.
What alot of people don’t realize, is that halo 1-3 were so successful was because for their time, it had alot of features that console fps didnt have at the time. If they just remade halo 1-3’s multiplayer today, would it sell? ya a little, but it still wouldnt make as much money as you’d think it would, because it was GOOD FOR ITS TIME. modern fps games need more features to compete, not fewer. Simply tailoring a game to 1 group among many, isnt gonna bring back the magic that was halo. Again, cant say it enough. halo 1-3 were good for their time. fps has evolved, and so must halo. people hate change. fact of life. to those people that hate the changes, goodbye. glad you’re leaving.
Want an example of this? Counter-Strike. CS was great for its times.I started playing cs back in early 2000. Here it is almost 2013, and they just released a new cs, and yanno what it, its basicly the same thing that it was back then, just new graphics. And yanno what, it hasnt been successful financially, or competitively, despite the older versions being the top competitve fps for years. Its died out, and they havnt changed hardly anything.
So asking 343 to basicly remake either halo 1-3, isnt gonna do much of anything, and quite frankly, is a bad a idea. It was good for its time, times have changed, halo must also change.
EDIT. Going to make this clear in the first post.
Development for halo 4 is done. You are not going to get a clone of halo 1-3. No amount of patching is going to turn back the pages, and turn halo 4 into halo 1-3. If you do not like halo 4, time to move on.
Did you even read my post? Good game design is not timeless. LOOK AT COUNTER-STRIKE. IT HASNT CHANGED IN OVER 10 YEARS. IT WAS TOP COMPETITVE FPS GAME. AND ITS DEAD. READ MY POST BEFORE REPLYING SIR.
I don’t disagree that the series needed to evolve, and will continue to need to evolve to remain competitive in the FPS gaming market. However, what I question are the particular changes that 343 opted to make in order to further develop the series. Ordinance drops are a great example of this. Halo has always been about map control, which is achieved largely through power weapon control and timing your team actions to take advantage of weapon spawns. Ordinance drops completely and utterly destroy that fundamental aspect of Halo. If I work to control the Sniper or Rockets, I should not be met with an Incineration Cannon or Beam Rifle to the face from some guy who lucked into it out of nowhere.
> Did you even read my post? Good game design is not timeless. LOOK AT COUNTER-STRIKE. IT HASNT CHANGED IN OVER 10 YEARS. IT WAS TOP COMPETITVE FPS GAME. AND ITS DEAD. READ MY POST BEFORE REPLYING SIR.
I did read your post, and I still maintain that good game design is timeless. The reason that Counter-Strike is “dead” is because most of the people who would have played it did play it, and they have lost interest in it. It is for the same reason that very few people watch the Lord of the Rings movies these days; because most people have already seen them. That, however, doesn’t stop them from being good movies.
Can’t say I agree OP. 343 changed halo to entice more people who just ended up going right back to cod, and now the actual halo fans are stuck with a game they don’t want.
there is a difference in not liking and wanting some things tweaked or
fixed.
I like halo 4 but i think it could use a ranking system and a few things
need fixed in a patch but i dont hate the game.
I’m a halo vet and love all the games and i understand thats its
evolving and im fine with that but they need to fix some things so it can
evolve properly.
> Did you even read my post? Good game design is not timeless. LOOK AT COUNTER-STRIKE. IT HASNT CHANGED IN OVER 10 YEARS. IT WAS TOP COMPETITVE FPS GAME. AND ITS DEAD. READ MY POST BEFORE REPLYING SIR.
Yeah, nobody like super mario anymore because, though it was a great franchise 20 years ago, nobody wants to play a game where you run and jump on things and get powerups,etc.
> > Did you even read my post? Good game design is not timeless. LOOK AT COUNTER-STRIKE. IT HASNT CHANGED IN OVER 10 YEARS. IT WAS TOP COMPETITVE FPS GAME. AND ITS DEAD. READ MY POST BEFORE REPLYING SIR.
>
> I did read your post, and I still maintain that good game design is timeless. The reason that Counter-Strike is “dead” is because most of the people who would have played it did play it, and they have lost interest in it. It is for the same reason that very few people watch the Lord of the Rings movies these days; because most people have already seen them. That, however, doesn’t stop them from being good movies.
Think about what you just said. Good game design is timeless? OK so lets say they remade halo 3 for example. exact same thing. just better graphics. What will happen by your logic after a few years? People will lose interest, and itll die out.
Thats why 343 made the changes to halo 4. Remaking halo 3, would just be stale and people would compare to cod and say “HEY LOOK, ITS THE SAME THING EVERY YEAR!”
Your logic is flawed. You say you dont like the changes, but want halo 4 to be the top fps again, yet if they do what you want and just remake halo 1-3, it would die out anyways by your logic. What the hell do you even want
@ Fattymcpatty Exactly. They appealed to the casual gaming audience. It worked for a few days, but they didn’t really add replayability, so they all dissapeared because a brand new casual game came out. It was also a slap in the face to the hardcore fans who were there through thick and thin.
Not at all. You’re talking about the content of a game; the weapons, the sound effects, the plot, the art, etc. I’m talking about game design overall. Perhaps if I had used the word “quality” instead of “design” that would have made more sense.
> This is directed at the old school halo players that do not like halo 4.
>
> <mark>What alot of people don’t realize, is that halo 1-3 were so successful was because for their time, it had alot of features that console fps didnt have at the time.</mark> If they just remade halo 1-3’s multiplayer today, would it sell? ya a little, but it still wouldnt make as much money as you’d think it would, because it was GOOD FOR ITS TIME. modern fps games need more features to compete, not fewer. Simply tailoring a game to 1 group among many, isnt gonna bring back the magic that was halo. Again, cant say it enough. halo 1-3 were good for their time. fps has evolved, and so must halo. people hate change. fact of life. to those people that hate the changes, goodbye. glad you’re leaving.
>
> Want an example of this? Counter-Strike. CS was great for its times.I started playing cs back in early 2000. Here it is almost 2013, and they just released a new cs, and yanno what it, its basicly the same thing that it was back then, just new graphics. And yanno what, it hasnt been successful financially, or competitively, despite the older versions being the top competitve fps for years. Its died out, and they havnt changed hardly anything.
>
> So asking 343 to basicly remake either halo 1-3, isnt gonna do much of anything, and quite frankly, is a bad a idea. It was good for its time, times have changed, halo must also change.
Oh I see, so the Halo series succeeded because of its innovations. I completely agree!
Hey you know what would be fun TC? If you were able to name ONE thing innovative about Halo 4, ONE thing which hasn’t been done before.
Not to mention halo 1-3 really didnt do anything innovative in the grand scheme of things( grand scheme of things meaning compared to all fps games, on any platform, specificly pc.)
Innovation dosnt = great for ther times.
> > Hey you know what would be fun TC? If you were able to name ONE thing innovative about Halo 4, ONE thing which hasn’t been done before.
>
> Spartan Ops strikes me as pretty novel.
Yeah but all these people care about is the fact that halo 4 isnt an exact clone of halo 1-3.
Not saying SO is bad, its ok and does have some novelty to it, but still.
> > This is directed at the old school halo players that do not like halo 4.
> >
> > <mark>What alot of people don’t realize, is that halo 1-3 were so successful was because for their time, it had alot of features that console fps didnt have at the time.</mark> If they just remade halo 1-3’s multiplayer today, would it sell? ya a little, but it still wouldnt make as much money as you’d think it would, because it was GOOD FOR ITS TIME. modern fps games need more features to compete, not fewer. Simply tailoring a game to 1 group among many, isnt gonna bring back the magic that was halo. Again, cant say it enough. halo 1-3 were good for their time. fps has evolved, and so must halo. people hate change. fact of life. to those people that hate the changes, goodbye. glad you’re leaving.
> >
> > Want an example of this? Counter-Strike. CS was great for its times.I started playing cs back in early 2000. Here it is almost 2013, and they just released a new cs, and yanno what it, its basicly the same thing that it was back then, just new graphics. And yanno what, it hasnt been successful financially, or competitively, despite the older versions being the top competitve fps for years. Its died out, and they havnt changed hardly anything.
> >
> > So asking 343 to basicly remake either halo 1-3, isnt gonna do much of anything, and quite frankly, is a bad a idea. It was good for its time, times have changed, halo must also change.
>
> Oh I see, so the Halo series succeeded because of its innovations. I completely agree!
> Hey you know what would be fun TC? If you were able to name ONE thing innovative about Halo 4, ONE thing which hasn’t been done before.
Because the other games out there are so innovative right? Go to bed.
Honestly your whole argument is pretty flawed OP. the changes between Halo 2 and 3 weren’t much, yet 3 years later still had a considerable amount of more people still playing than Halo 4. 4 has been out for less than a month and the highest peak I’ve seen recently is 150k. I think that says something about 343’s changes to halo.