What Halo Needs To Survive

This will be straight to the point.
I have been playing Halo since 2002 and have seen it rise and fall.
Halo has been dead since Halo:Reach came out. This is all due to Bungie implementing a casual side of Halo. Lets take a step back for a moment. Halo 1 had a formula consisting of Grenades, Melee and Guns. This is the basics for a good Halo game. It had other things, like Active Camo and Overshield, BUT these were things you had to FIGHT for or you had the skill to grenade the powerup and have it be launched to you. This was extremely hard in my opinion, thus creating a skillgap just for a powerup.

Halo 2 comes out. Huge success and MLG starts to be noticed by the average Halo player. What did Halo 2 do right? Why was it popular?
Besides the fact that it BUILD the Xbox Live Experience(Friends list,Message system and Matchmaking)it was a great COMPETITIVE TITLE. This is what games need. They need to be as hard as the other player makes it for you. Just as a more recent example, Titanfall is a HORRIBLE competitive title. This game has no Skill Based Ranking System, Sprint and HUGE maps. What is a skill based ranking system? An IN GAME visible rank that is based off of Wins and Losses. THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. This keeps people wanting to play. This Ranking system needs to be hard to reach and hard to keep. Ranks should be reset at the end of a season once every couple of months, moving on. Halo 2 also had BXR and Double Shot Triple shot etc.
this creates more of a skillgap. Halo 2 had a 1-50 ranking system, which i would like to see return to Halo. Another option would be to have a ranking system similar to Call Of Duty:Black Ops 2. This ranking system had you play 5 games to be put into a division, and had 200 slots per division(i think). They had 5 divisions including Iron,Bronze,Silver,Gold,Platinum and Masters. I only got to Silver, While most Professional Players got into Masters. This would be a good option for Halo in my opinion also. Moving on.

Halo 3 comes out. MLG picks up the game right away and success continues. Halo 3 releases with a 1-50 ranking system and later introduces an EXP ranking system for each playlist, keeping the game fresh(a year after the game is released). Nothing really bad to say about Halo 3. Halo 3 had great maps like The Pit, Guardian, Narrows, Construct etc. They also implemented a new gamemode, Forge. This allowed players to create there own maps in spaces like Foundry, which is just an empty room. Great, almost perfect game except for online connection issues.

Halo:Reach. where do I start. Reach gets picked up by MLG and almost gets dropped from MLG. this game starts with bloom,which was randomness, armor abilities which are game breaking and sprint which is game breaking and NO RANKING SYSTEM. Bloom is bad because a bad player can kill a good player because they spammed their DMR and randomly hit all 5 shots while the pro hits 4 shots because he is shooting slower and hits all his shots but loses because of randomness. Lets say a player jumps top mid on lockout Halo 2. The player gets killed because of making a stupid play. In Halo 4, if i jump top middle, and i get shot i can sprint away with no consequences of making a stupid play. 343 industries “saves” MLG Halo Reach by removing Sprint, armor abilities and Bloom. i have played this version of Halo Reach and the game plays great because of the update. This made people trust 343 industries for Halo 4.

Halo 4 comes out and MLG doesn’t pick it up. The game launches with NO competitive playlist,no ranks, armor abilities no descope, sprint and ordinance. Horrible. Goes from 400K player in the first week, to 80k, a lot of the reason belonging to the release of a good competitive title Call of duty:Black Ops 2.

Halo needs a good competitive ranking system, no sprint, No armor abilities, no bloom, Descope need to be in the game to make the sniper not over powered. it also needs a competitive matchmaking playlist and a good one and good maps.

Halo need the perfect Triangle of Melee, Grenades and Guns.

You know, I’m really getting sick of seeing threads like this, because it would seem 99,000 of these threads all exist.

Halo doesn’t ‘NEED’ any of the things you posted to survive. Some would help, yes, but you aren’t an expert on everything the Halo series needs to exist.

Honestly, your post doesn’t even make sense. You criticise Halo 4 for being a poor example of a competitive title because of sprint, loadouts, and similar stuff, but yet, you praise CALL OF DUTY, the franchise that inspired all of those things, as being a good competitive title.

Have you played Black Ops 2 recently? It’s BS, because I can’t walk five feet without another A-10 Warthog blowing me to smithereens thanks to a 5-star general with a penchant for quickscoping. Not competitive. More like vultures.

> You know, I’m really getting sick of seeing threads like this, because it would seem 99,000 of these threads all exist.
>
> Halo doesn’t ‘NEED’ any of the things you posted to survive. Some would help, yes, but you aren’t an expert on everything the Halo series needs to exist.
>
> Honestly, your post doesn’t even make sense. You criticise Halo 4 for being a poor example of a competitive title because of sprint, loadouts, and similar stuff, but yet, you praise CALL OF DUTY, the franchise that inspired all of those things, as being a good competitive title.
>
> Have you played Black Ops 2 recently? It’s BS, because I can’t walk five feet without another A-10 Warthog blowing me to smithereens thanks to a 5-star general with a penchant for quickscoping. Not competitive. More like vultures.

He’s only praising Blops 2’s league play ranking system, which by the way, had me playing the game for months on end because it provided competitive incentive. Not saying Blops 2 is perfect, but it was one of the few titles to launch in 2012 with a ranking system built competitively from the ground up.

It needs to continue to build off the roaring success of halo 4. The addition of great features like inherent spiriting and loadout selections was awsome and took halo to a whole new level, but we need to go further.

More individual customization is nessisary, and it needs to feel realistic. I’m hoping for a training point allocation system where each level you get on your way to 130 you can put towards skills you want selected from a broad list hopefully organized into trees. This would enhance the feeling of being a spartan trained in a certain area of expertise.

We need customizable gear too. Weapons, armor abilities, armor mods, these all should be able to be tweaked to the players liking making the gameplay more realistic, immersive, and fun.

Last big thing we need is more movement options such as wall hugging, diving and climbing, etc.

This all would make for an amazing halo 5

> > You know, I’m really getting sick of seeing threads like this, because it would seem 99,000 of these threads all exist.
> >
> > <mark>Halo doesn’t ‘NEED’ any of the things you posted to survive. Some would help, yes, but you aren’t an expert on everything the Halo series needs to exist.</mark>
> >
> > Honestly, your post doesn’t even make sense. You criticise Halo 4 for being a poor example of a competitive title because of sprint, loadouts, and similar stuff, but yet, you praise CALL OF DUTY, the franchise that inspired all of those things, as being a good competitive title.
> >
> > Have you played Black Ops 2 recently? It’s BS, because I can’t walk five feet without another A-10 Warthog blowing me to smithereens thanks to a 5-star general with a penchant for quickscoping. Not competitive. More like vultures.
>
> He’s only praising Blops 2’s league play ranking system, which by the way, had me playing the game for months on end because it provided competitive incentive. Not saying Blops 2 is perfect, but it was one of the few titles to launch in 2012 with a ranking system built competitively from the ground up.

I’m sorry, one can misunderstand it if he says this.

> release of a good competitive title Call of duty:Black Ops 2.

But I digress. I’ll admit to being wrong and not reading thoroughly enough, but my main basis (The highlighted one) still stands. He’s entitled to his own opinion, and I’m entitled to think his is total crap.

> Halo need the perfect Triangle of Melee, Grenades and Guns.

No it doesn’t. The static triangle is a gross oversimplification of Halo’s gameplay model for one very good reason: vehicles (but for the sake of clarity let me say that this is NOT my main point.)

Not every map has them but between the balancing needs of BTB and the campaign they certainly do have an effect on how weapons and grenades handle (shifting the lengths of the sides by some degree that ISN’T related to the three major aspects.) When they’re in play too vehicles can wildly shift the balance of those three “core” Halo elements as at a stroke you can more or less nullify melee, some grenades and weapons, but at the same time push a lot of attention towards other guns and plasma grenades. Think too how the “Balance” of guns, grenades, and melee attacks shift as weapons and maps change as well. What might be an even arrangement on a medium-ish map might give way completely to guns with just a little less cover and your standard compliment of BR’s, or with a little more if there happens to be a shotgun spawn. Small changes, huge shifts in flow and balance.

The point is that Halo’s system is characteristically unstable. The lengths of each side of the triangle are never the same from one moment to the other and even taking the broader view, there’s no reasonable average that is any way representative of what this game is. Asking then that 343 try to refocus and narrow down what the game should be is rather short sighted, because how can you pinpoint just what made a probability density field so good?

If there’s anything Halo needs its quite simply for people to stop imposing their singular expectations on it. Let it be chaos (and let 343 exploit that aspect.)

> You know, I’m really getting sick of seeing threads like this, because it would seem 99,000 of these threads all exist.
>
> Halo doesn’t ‘NEED’ any of the things you posted to survive. Some would help, yes, but you aren’t an expert on everything the Halo series needs to exist.

> > Halo need the perfect Triangle of Melee, Grenades and Guns.
>
> No it doesn’t. The static triangle is a gross oversimplification of Halo’s gameplay model for one very good reason: vehicles (but for the sake of clarity let me say that this is NOT my main point.)

These.

Not to mention that I fully expect any game that completely opts out of what are seen as standard features of the FPS franchise now to suffer both in reviews, for being “dated,” and in sales.

A happy medium that takes the concepts and utilizes them using the same themes that the franchise has done in the past is needed as well as a place for the people who still prefer the old ways of doing things.

> Have you played Black Ops 2 recently? It’s BS, because I can’t walk five feet without another A-10 Warthog blowing me to smithereens thanks to a 5-star general with a penchant for quickscoping. Not competitive. More like vultures.

Damn, Well there goes my plan about buying and getting into COD Black Ops 2.

>

I Disagree!

Firstly before we start the “You are the minority Stubborn Barren, Halo needs to go back to classic gameplay” speech… Halo needs to innovate to keep it fresh. I however agree the current aspect of multiplayer is not fully adequate… I agree that it needs to return to Halo 2/Halo 3 competitive multiplayer, however… (continued in next post)

Halo has been around for almost 14 years now…

I quote…
"Times they are a changin" ~ Bob Dylan

And with that, the gameplay mechanics and entertainment of the fanbase changes with it…

So I do agree that Halo 4 had a lot of mistakes… yet it wasn’t without some merit. There was some new modes, with new interaction, better immersion in the world of Halo and some great game mechanics. Yet there was also a lot wrong with it…

For Halo to become a great shooter once more, and not a reskinned sci-fi Call Of Duty, it should return to Halo 2 and Halo 3 aspects of gameplay. Yet this should be purely for Halo competitive matchmaking… while the more casual components should be implementing sprint, armor abilities and ordinance drops.

The casual games are things like Race, Flood/Infection, Action Sack, Invasion, Dominion… and other fun things of this nature… yet the competitive is the slayers and objective (CTF, oddball, king of the hill)… the original Combat Evolved playlists.

This way the casual gamers can still keep their gameplay and settings as well as making games more realistic like Flood Last Stand.

Plus I must add that 343 Industries stated that Sprint is now a fundamental of Halo… it ain’t going anywhere…

Remember…

"No gamer’s opinion is above anyone else, NO MATTER WHAT! Yes your voice counts, but to fully give the Halo franchise back its potential and influence in the shooter history books… it needs to BRIDGE, NOT SEPARATE, the gorge that is forming around the Halo multiplayer gameplay. Everyone needs to be able to maneuver somewhat… otherwise the game will never reach its peak."

> <mark>It needs to continue to build off the roaring success of halo 4.</mark> The addition of great features like inherent spiriting and loadout selections was awsome and took halo to a whole new level, but we need to go further.
>
> More individual customization is nessisary, and it needs to feel realistic. I’m hoping for a training point allocation system where each level you get on your way to 130 you can put towards skills you want selected from a broad list hopefully organized into trees. This would enhance the feeling of being a spartan trained in a certain area of expertise.
>
> We need customizable gear too. Weapons, armor abilities, armor mods, these all should be able to be tweaked to the players liking making the gameplay more realistic, immersive, and fun.
>
> Last big thing we need is more movement options such as wall hugging, diving and climbing, etc.
>
> This all would make for an amazing halo 5

Yea, Halo 4 was a huge success! *Losses more than 80% of the population in the first year.

> > <mark>It needs to continue to build off the roaring success of halo 4.</mark> The addition of great features like inherent spiriting and loadout selections was awsome and took halo to a whole new level, but we need to go further.
> >
> > More individual customization is nessisary, and it needs to feel realistic. I’m hoping for a training point allocation system where each level you get on your way to 130 you can put towards skills you want selected from a broad list hopefully organized into trees. This would enhance the feeling of being a spartan trained in a certain area of expertise.
> >
> > We need customizable gear too. Weapons, armor abilities, armor mods, these all should be able to be tweaked to the players liking making the gameplay more realistic, immersive, and fun.
> >
> > Last big thing we need is more movement options such as wall hugging, diving and climbing, etc.
> >
> > This all would make for an amazing halo 5
>
> Yea, Halo 4 was a huge success! *Losses more than 80% of the population in the first year.

Don’t feed him!

Topics like these are useful instead.

I think that halo does not need to be like cod. Awards killings change the skill balance too: Strong players become even stronger. Weak players become frustrated…

Armor abilities are not good… if if at the time of Halo 2 it was said that in the future there would be the armor lock, people would have laughed…

Halo 2 was a success because the gameplay was genuine, unaltherated… power weapons had to be conquered on the map, it didn’t rain from the sky…This required more strategy… there were not AA and other things…

last thing: the maps must be small!! the best gameplay was in small maps… lockout, reflection, midship was jewelry… so, small maps and no run. I hope these maps will be proposed again…

This is what it needs to survive:
-Ranked/Social playlists
-Dynamic weapon spawns
-No loadouts
-No AAs
-Power ups as picks up

My list could keep going if needed.

> You know, I’m really getting sick of seeing threads like this, because it would seem 99,000 of these threads all exist.
>
> Halo doesn’t ‘NEED’ any of the things you posted to survive.

You don’t see that as a contradiction? It would seem like if “99,000” threads exist asking for certain things to be added, removed, or changed, it would probably be a good idea to make those changes. 99,000 is more than Halo 4’s peak population of 20,000, after all.

I have to agree with others. This is no different to any other post that I read every day on this forum.

> Topics like these are useful instead.
>
> I think that halo does not need to be like cod. Awards killings change the skill balance too: Strong players become even stronger. Weak players become frustrated…
>
> Armor abilities are not good… if if at the time of Halo 2 it was said that in the future there would be the armor lock, people would have laughed…
>
> Halo 2 was a success because the gameplay was genuine, unaltherated… power weapons had to be conquered on the map, it didn’t rain from the sky…This required more strategy… there were not AA and other things…
>
> last thing: <mark>the maps must be small!! the best gameplay was in small maps… lockout, reflection, midship was jewelry</mark>… so, small maps and no run. I hope these maps will be proposed again…

BTB > 4v4

> > Topics like these are useful instead.
> >
> > I think that halo does not need to be like cod. Awards killings change the skill balance too: Strong players become even stronger. Weak players become frustrated…
> >
> > Armor abilities are not good… if if at the time of Halo 2 it was said that in the future there would be the armor lock, people would have laughed…
> >
> > Halo 2 was a success because the gameplay was genuine, unaltherated… power weapons had to be conquered on the map, it didn’t rain from the sky…This required more strategy… there were not AA and other things…
> >
> > last thing: <mark>the maps must be small!! the best gameplay was in small maps… lockout, reflection, midship was jewelry</mark>… so, small maps and no run. I hope these maps will be proposed again…
>
> BTB > 4v4

I think he is referring to smaller team maps. Obviously BTB will have it’s own larger maps but as far as the 4v4 maps are concerned, in past titles they have been getting worse. Maps like Complex (now in BTB) and Solace (used by BTb.net) are many times bigger than maps like Midship or Guardian. Pit, Guardian, Midship, Lockout, Ivory Tower, Sanctuary, Prisoner, Countdown, Haven, Skyline, Construct ect all have something in common: they are small and played perfect. Also how many times do you here Complex is my favorite map.

It might be what Halo needs to survive for you.

Fair competition and a skill based ranking system might be good aspects for a game but it won’t make Halo an overall good game nor will it help it to survive.

What people liked so much about Halo 2 and 3 wasn’t that it was super competitve in comparison to Reach and 4 but they have liked, aware or unaware, that the game was designed with depth what reflected in high-quality and entertaining (and eventually competitive) gameplay.
Halo 2 and 3’s multiplayer gameplay has such a high quality because all the varied game elements (maps, settings, sandboxes, etc.) greatly harmonize with each other most of the time and for the most part.

In Halo 4 that is not the case. The game elements conflict with each other nearly at all ends. There isn’t much harmonious gameplay and hence there is a significant drop in quality (apparently at least for the vast majority) what reflected in a significant and inconsistent drop of the online population.

The mentioned triangle has only been a small part of Halo’s gameplay.

What Halo needs as a multiplayer (gameplay) concept is a circle.
Think about it.

> Halo has been dead since Halo:Reach came out. This is all due to Bungie implementing a casual side of Halo.

Here we go again…

> What did Halo 2 do right? Why was it popular?
> Besides the fact that it BUILD the Xbox Live Experience(Friends list,Message system and Matchmaking)it was a great COMPETITIVE TITLE.

Exceptitwasn’tlul.

> This is what games need. They need to be as hard as the other player makes it for you.

Yes, no. Games should have a level of difficulty that keeps the player engaged, but at the same time they have to avoid being too difficult to the point the player just drops the game.

Really we could remove aim assist, have everyone spawn with snipers, and make it so headshots are the only way to do damage. But I can guarantee not a lot of people would enjoy that kind of play.

> Just as a more recent example, Titanfall is a HORRIBLE competitive title. This game has no Skill Based Ranking System, Sprint and HUGE maps.

I don’t see how either of those three inherently make it a non-competitive title, not that I disagree.

> What is a skill based ranking system? An IN GAME visible rank that is based off of Wins and Losses.

A ranking system doesn’t have to be in-game to still be a ranking system. Nor does it have to be based off of wins and losses.

A ranking system is simply a system that categorizes and matches players by ‘skill’. That is the base definition, and there are many ways to go from there.

> This Ranking system needs to be hard to reach and hard to keep.

In my opinion a ranking system should be hard to keep, it shouldn’t be hard to reach. Grinding to a high level then quitting the game is what a progression system is designed for, yet that’s exactly what happened with Halo 3’s “ranking system”.

> Halo 2 also had BXR and Double Shot Triple shot etc.
> this creates more of a skillgap.

There are better ways to create a skill gap.

> This game starts with bloom,which was randomness

So you praise Halo 3 for being an almost perfect game, at the same time you criticize bloom in Halo Reach. You do realize the purely random spread on the BR is inherently more random than the controllable spread of Halo Reach’s DMR, right?

> The release of a good competitive title Call of duty:Black Ops 2.

How can you bash Titanfall yet praise Black Ops when they both share similar mechanics?

> Halo need the perfect Triangle of Melee, Grenades and Guns.

If you’re aiming for a competitive title arguably melee shouldn’t even exist. It’s just a cheap tool for escaping CQC encounters instead of having to actually aim. It takes LESS skill than simply shooting your opponent, especially with the addition of lunge in Halo 2.

Furthermore, this triangle mentality is silly because it inherently prevents anything NEW from being added to the game. You can have the game revolve around more than just grenades and shooting while still remaining competitive.