Halo doesn’t need features that mess with the actual gameplay, it needs features outside of matchmaking. We don’t need Sprint, Armor Lock, Perks, or Custom Loadouts; We need things like spectator mode, full map-editors, clan battles, and ranked playlists.
a
The gameplay can’t stagnate either.
I don’t want rehashed Halo games every few years. That’s a road I would like to avoid travelling. Besides I want 343 to keep it fresh with new features.
That’s my opinion.
> Halo doesn’t need features that mess with the actual gameplay, it needs features outside of matchmaking. We don’t need Sprint, Armor Lock, Perks, or Custom Loadouts; We need things like <mark>spectator mode, full map-editors</mark>, clan battles, and ranked playlists.
Those would be amazing! Don’t forget a Custom Games Browser! :3
> Well, we want things that change the game, but they can’t be drastic like sprint. I don’t know how sprint even made its way into the game. All these lies about how 343 was going to deliver a “Classic” Halo experience. Reach 2 isn’t a classic experience.
Exactly. From the way Halo 4 is looking, keeping it classic and not adding features like sprint, “perks”, and custom loadouts will make it a great game. I think, if 343 is adding new features, they should be outside of the gameplay. Honestly, spectator mode is something Halo has needed for a while. I always want to watch my friends 1v1’s, but you can’t do that in Halo.
Actually…
It doesn’t need them. Just like we never needed a more complex gaming system than the NES. But it will make the game better rather than having it remain stuck with decade old gameplay.
> I don’t want rehashed Halo games every few years. That’s a road I would like to avoid travelling. Besides I want 343 to keep it fresh with new features.
> That’s my opinion.
I’m not saying literally the same game. I’m saying changes like Halo 2 to Halo 3 (without 3’s terrible net-code), not changes like Halo 3 to Reach, where the core Halo gameplay is completely destroyed.
Halo 4 starts the NEW trilogy of Halo games, so it would be important to have NEW things added to the game, if you don’t want the NEW stick with the old and play Halo 3.
> > Well, we want things that change the game, but they can’t be drastic like sprint. I don’t know how sprint even made its way into the game. All these lies about how 343 was going to deliver a “Classic” Halo experience. Reach 2 isn’t a classic experience.
>
> Exactly. From the way Halo 4 is looking, keeping it classic and not adding features like sprint, “perks”, and custom loadouts will make it a great game. I think, if 343 is adding new features, they should be outside of the gameplay. Honestly, spectator mode is something Halo has needed for a while. I always want to watch my friends 1v1’s, but you can’t do that in Halo.
Lol. I always make a platform in the sky for every “1v1 worthy” map.
Then, everyone sits on that platform. 
> Actually…
>
> It doesn’t need them. Just like we never needed a more complex gaming system than the NES. But it will make the game better rather than having it remain stuck with decade old gameplay.
You do realize that in every halo game all you do is; move, jump, shoot, melee, and throw grenades right? If you’re tired of repetition you should have moved on to something else, maybe skydiving, approximately 4 halo games ago.
So basically you want Halo 3 but with updated graphics.
> So basically you want Halo 3 but with updated graphics.
Yeah, lots of people just want this.
> > So basically you want Halo 3 but with updated graphics.
>
> Yeah, lots of people just want this.
And when Halo 3 was prominent, people wanted Halo 2 with better graphics. Everything looks better in rose-tinted glasses. So yeah, I don’t buy that statement of yours.
Sorry, change is the story of Halo. Each iteration is very different from the last.
Remember, barring Halo 1, your favorite Halo game was a big change from the previous game. So don’t say we don’t need new gameplay features when your favorite Halo was such a deviation from the last game.
> Halo 4 starts the NEW trilogy of Halo games
I can play that game too bud 
Yeah, they can change around the weapon sandbox to fit the campaign, I’m fine with that. Add a few, not repetitive (do we really need a Plasma Rifle, Plasma Repeater, and Spiker?), weapons here and there. Add things that change the game completely, like AA’s and loadouts, Hell no. It’s a Halo game. You don’t see Quake adding sprint or jetpack, do you? You don’t see CoD adding a shield system, do you?
A series of video games should maintain it’s identity. New features outside of the gameplay can keep this in tact, and add something new.
> Well, we want things that change the game, but they can’t be <mark>drastic like sprint</mark>. I don’t know how sprint even made its way into the game. All these lies about how 343 was going to deliver a “Classic” Halo experience. Reach 2 isn’t a classic experience.
If they are as little a change as sprint, the average person won’t even notice these ‘drastic changes’.
> So basically you want Halo 3 but with updated graphics.
No; I want a Halo 3 that doesn’t lag and a community that won’t abandon the game when the next new thing comes out. Graphics aren’t that important in the grand scheme of things.
> > I don’t want rehashed Halo games every few years. That’s a road I would like to avoid travelling. Besides I want 343 to keep it fresh with new features.
> > That’s my opinion.
>
> I’m not saying literally the same game. I’m saying changes like Halo 2 to Halo 3 (without 3’s terrible net-code), not changes like Halo 3 to Reach, where the core Halo gameplay is completely destroyed.
I see what you mean but remember how Halo 2 changed the core gameplay from Combat Evolved with the addition of Vehicle boarding and Dual Wielding? Bungie took the chance and it worked, both of those things became welcome additions to the series.
However in Reach they tried to change it again with disasterous results, which was unfortunate. Changes aren’t necessarily a bad thing as long as they can be implimented and balanced properly.
> You don’t see CoD adding a shield system, do you?
>
> A series of video games should maintain it’s identity. New features outside of the gameplay can keep this in tact, and add something new.
Except Call of Duty changed it’s gameplay inside of the game with perks after CoD3 and is now the most played FPS franchise on the market. Halo is free to stay the same, but sooner or later it’s going to have to change in some degree, and I don’t mean simply through outside issues. After CE, every bigtime shooter used Halo’s formula and improved. Why can’t Halo?