What made halo 4 the worst

Hello!

I would just like to say I had really enjoyed halo 4. It was a great game, but not a great halo.
343, when they had started developing halo 4, they needed something, they needed something to actually follow. They started in the right way, but ended up into a population drop and a disappointment to the halo community. 343 had taken the safe path, by just ripping off a bunch of mechanics from call of duty, which is not great. It wasn’t innovative and at the end of the day people still played, leaving only some people enjoying it. Halo 4 was not being innovative, taking things from other games isn’t innovation. Innovation is where we bring up a new idea, thrusting in halo 5 is innovative. Warzone is innovative. Halo 5, which I’m actually very excited for. Why? Because it is very innovative.
Halo 4 just ended up where you ran around died and spawned.

Other games have their formula,
We need ours.

Loadouts and Boltshotgun.

  • No Firefight. - Personal Ordnance in most multiplayer gamemodes. - Perks and Support Upgrades. They have no place in Halo whatsoever. - Increased range on all precision weapons. - Ability to spawn with Plasma Grenades and Plasma Pistols. - A lot of bad armor.

First, I take exception to the way you’ve phrased the question. Halo 4 is, in the opinion of some, far from the worst Halo.

But if we want to proceed with the flawed premise, then I’d say that what made Halo 4 the worst was the garbage attitude of players who would turn down a bucket of gold because what they were used to was a bucket of crap and they only want what they were used to. Sorry if that seems harsh, but it really felt like it was invited…

  • Halo 4 was 343’s test run. The game didn’t feel really balanced due to that. (very forgivable)

  • What really got me mad was Flood mode, a strict offshoot of Infection that effectively limited the customizability of customs (and that stupid music was annoying). Don’t get me wrong, I think it played well for online standard matchmaking, but there’s a reason why I played Reach customs most of the time… (NOT forgivable)

  • No UNSC air vehicles. (not forgivable)

  • Art style was kind of ugly (forgivable)

Saying halo 4 was the worst is a matter of opinion. Most of the prior halos revolved around partied up teams dominating the power weapon spawn points, thus dominating the game. To a certain degree h4 changed that, it wasn’t so easy to predict what weapons the enemy team were armed with. So I guess a lot of players had their egos deflated. Even in h4 you see partied up teams prowling the lobbies, looking for teams of random noobs to play against, but it isn’t quite as easy to predict as it used to be.

loadouts
boltshot
ordnance
perks
uneven starts

One thing I hate with halo 4 is that you can’t play spartan ops without with gold membership. If you lose the internet connection while you play spartan ops the game don’t save that you have completed the mission.
Otherwise I like the halo 4.

> 2533274917158807;3:
> - No Firefight.
> - Personal Ordnance in most multiplayer gamemodes.
> - Perks and Support Upgrades. They have no place in Halo whatsoever.
> - Increased range on all precision weapons.
> - Ability to spawn with Plasma Grenades and Plasma Pistols.
> - A lot of bad armor.

More than 70% of the armor is completely unwanted trash that no one wants, and guess whats making a return in halo 5 all the crappy armor and even more awful looking trash for your spartan to wear!

Halo 4’s story felt more like bad fan-fiction than a professionally written installment to the series.

> 2811398874529013;10:
> Halo 4’s story felt more like bad fan-fiction than a professionally written installment to the series.

its been awhile
halo 4’s story was actually quite immersive and quite good

> 2533274949192941;11:
> > 2811398874529013;10:
> > Halo 4’s story felt more like bad fan-fiction than a professionally written installment to the series.
>
>
> its been awhile
> halo 4’s story was actually quite immersive and quite good

Out of curiosity what did you find immersive and good about the Campaign?

Sounds like the argument that is often used for Halo 5: Good game (from a gameplay perspective, as people keep emphasizing), but not a good HALO game.

I’d say that the sprint ability (which was originally introduced in Halo: Reach), and the rather weak main villain (he was rather shallow in the game itself) were drawbacks to Halo 4, but most everything else about its campaign was great, particularly the Cortana Rampancy plot. Reason why I bring up sprinting is because it kind of takes the “Halo” feeling away. But I still think it’s an enjoyable campaign on several levels.

Halo 4’s problem wasn’t so much that it was good to some, and bad to others… but that it wasn’t good to many, if not all. 343i tried too much to introduce new players to the series, and too little to please Halo’s existing community.

(the same could be said about Bungie & Reach)

That being said, the game has still bared a lot of good fruit, and there’s so much that can be done to bring out it’s full potential… even if that means a small group of people from the community taking it into their own hands to bring back many things that old Halo fans loved and cherished from previous titles, and create so much new and rich ideas that can please everyone from both sides of the fence.

It tried to hard to cater to cod players

> 2533274923675030;15:
> It tried to hard to cater to cod players

yh thats why it is terrible for halo players

For me its the campaign, its kinda of boring…

> 2533275027096210;17:
> For me its the campaign, its kinda of boring…

i liked the campaign tbh

I think that the armor customization looked terrible, the helmets looked like they were for blind people or for people with really small eyes. (No offense to some Asian people)

People that want the same thing over and over again and don’t enjoy change sound like COD fans instead of Halo fans.