Do you think the Halo franchise should have ended with Halo 3, or do think think it was worth it to make Halo Reach and Halo 4? Explain your opinion.
Even after Reach and 4 I think Halo games should be released. They just need to make them be like a Halo game. Oh and add a poll.
It should have ended with 3. Story-wise, 3 was clearly the end, and the story is exceptionally convoluted now to try to twist it to make it last longer.
Bungie should have been allowed to make a new game that could have had Halo’s mechanics, and Microsoft could have promoted it like Halo, and it could have been xbox exclusive.
It would have been the best thing to do all around.
> Even after Reach and 4 I think Halo games should be released. They just need to make them be like a Halo game. Oh and add a poll.
Oops, forgot to add it. Will do that right now
Reach was a good game, it was a prequel to the series. I wish I could have spend more time in Matchmaking with that game. yes, I think it was a good thing Halo was continued. I like the way the new trilogy is turning out to be. I don’t think the plot is convoluted, i simply differentiate Bungie’s trilogy with 343 triogy. Don’t get me wrong, I really liked Halo 3, but Halo 4 is the evolution of the series. I really enjoyed my time with the 4th title. I want more Halo -Yoink!- it!
For Microsoft yes.
He means ‘us’ as the fans. Absolutely, Reach while graphically a disapointment and a boring campaign, was a lot of fun with online multiplayer. I love Reach for giving us the DMR.
Halo 4 is a better game in all areas to Reach but the current matchmaking setup is a joke. No in game 1-50 ranks, no objective games in BTB, playlists like classic, snipers, doubles removed for no reason.
The ultimate question is Halo 4 better than Halo 3? NO! But then Halo 3, while a superior campaign to Halo 2 and had some great online maps like Rats Nest and Valhalla but lacked the all round genius maps of Halo 2.
Halo 2 is the basically still considered the GREATEST of all the Halos. To be Halo 2 is what 343 should be aiming for with all upcoming sequels in terms of multiplayer. Also please make the campaign harder like CE was, I want elites to jump away from grenades in legendary.
> Even after Reach and 4 I think Halo games should be released. They just need to make them be like a Halo game. Oh and add a poll.
Pretty much this. I still think Reach should have been made, just to show Microsoft that ‘modernisation’ will not work in Halo! Obviously it didn’t work…
Anybody who thinks these games were not worth making really needs to get over themselves. They may not have has been as great as Halo 2 but if you held every game to that standard, hardly any would get made in the first place. Halo 4 has a lot of room to grow and by the end of Reach’s lifespan, I would say it was a damn good game. The only problem there was that it was far too late to bring back a larger population for the game.
They made money, didn’t they?
But seriously, I have my qualms with halo 4, and a few with reach too, but that doesn’t mean I think the series should have ended. I am on the halo 4 waypoint forum after all.
If the series would have ended with 3, it would have ended on a low note.
Between annoying Cortana, boring Chief, bad character deaths, bad resolutions to plots, and stupid floaty jumping, I would have been pretty disappointed if it ended there.
However Reach gave us back the fun Elites, great character customization, pretty cool forge, though without a lot of the small details 3 had, assassinations, full access to just about everything online or offline. And also, badass new weapons. Lookin’ at you propipe. Brought in really customizable FF, with matchmaking. And match making on campaign. (Though late.)
And four, well, it gave us a more personal story between Cortana and Chief, a new type of enemies. (Though needs more types, some vehicles, and less annoying tactics.) New weapons all together, which is nice, better balanced AAs and new style for Spartans. Etc, etc.
Basically, yeah, they should have been made.
> He means ‘us’ as the fans. Absolutely, Reach while graphically a disapointment and a boring campaign, was a lot of fun with online multiplayer. I love Reach for giving us the DMR.
>
> Halo 4 is a better game in all areas to Reach but the current matchmaking setup is a joke. No in game 1-50 ranks, no objective games in BTB, playlists like classic, snipers, doubles removed for no reason.
>
> The ultimate question is Halo 4 better than Halo 3? NO! But then Halo 3, while a superior campaign to Halo 2 and had some great online maps like Rats Nest and Valhalla but lacked the all round genius maps of Halo 2.
>
> Halo 2 is the basically still considered the GREATEST of all the Halos. To be Halo 2 is what 343 should be aiming for with all upcoming sequels in terms of multiplayer. Also please make the campaign harder like CE was, I want elites to jump away from grenades in legendary.
Halo 3 was the most balanced of all Halos and the skill gap was very pronounced. You’re joking if you’re saying that Halo 3 didn’t have unique and spectacular maps. Did you forget Pit, Guardian, Construct, Snowbound? Those were great maps and very very unique in their set-up.
Halo 2 was a spectacular shooter for its time, especially since it was the first multiplayer game I played with others online, but the skill gap wasn’t as pronounced as compared to 3. Those with a modded Xbox and controller could out-perform you any day.
I want a balanced game with mechanics and gameplay similar to Halo 3. Halo Reach is a shame in the Halo timeline, with the a made up story not found in the novels, nor is it following any of the novels’ descriptions, and the multiplayer was just bad. Reach maps were garbage from day one.
> Do you think the Halo franchise should have ended with Halo 3, or do think think it was worth it to make Halo Reach and Halo 4? Explain your opinion.
Halo ODST and Reach represent Bungie’s contractual agreement with Microsoft to make 5 Halo games. Why else would they continue working on Halo games as prequels/side stories after they’d become independant from Microsoft, out of the goodness of their heart?
When you sign an exclusivity deal with Microsoft it’s for X number of games, that’s why after a main story line finishes the developer will produce some more titles to fill the agreement. Gears of war is the same situation, Epic Games told the story they wanted to tell in Gears 1, 2 and 3 and on March 19th you Gears of War: Judgement, a game that represents Epic Games contractual agreement with Microsoft.
Developing video games is a business and most of the time games get made for business reasons, not a bunch of talented people sitting around saying “hey woul’dn’t this be a cool idea for a game?”
Halo Reach was really fun. I love the hell out of Reach. Halo 4 is meh. Good Halo game I guess, but could do some much better if it didn’t have some many class-based shooter features.
Yes, I love the Halo series
Halos Halo man, as long as it’s out there and alive and breathing, I will be right there alongside Chief and the community.
> I love Reach for giving us the DMR. .
I…uuuh…Im done! Just done!!!
Ok so i have quite a mixed opinion because i do think that the games since halo 3 have not been able to compete with the fun which i had on halo 3 as custom games have been pushed to one side in order to develop a more competitive approach which is also good.
And i also think that maybe chief’s story made more sense to end at halo 3 but on the other hand i thought that no way could chief just be left drifting through space as that was i crap ending and i would have been really disappointed if the halo franchise would have ended so for that reason i want the franchise to continue because it is my favourite games series.
I think that there’s a pretty good point to make for Reach not being worth it. Everything that was poured into it would have been much better spent on ODST.
seeing as 4 is the best halo game since ce/3, i think it was very worth it.