Why 343 NEED to go back to the classic formula!

Community General Discussion
#1

Sorry to say, people who enjoy Halo 5 and the new direction it has taken, and don’t want the franchise to return to its roots, are going to be ticked off by what i’m gonna say in this post, but I feel like this has to be said.

343 over the past 4 years have changed the dynamics and fundamental gameplay of the Halo games DRASTICALLY, this is undeniable. The thing is, they shouldn’t have. Whatever their strange reasoning was, they decided to take a multi-million dollar franchise that had a HUGE following, and completely change the dynamic. They’ve decided that catering to a different, more “trendy” audience is the way to go, but this was a mistake. 343 are catering to an audience that realistically, doesn’t care about Halo. They have followed trends in gameplay to try keep Halo more modern, and all that has done is kill what made Halo so unique. These people you’re trying to draw in to the franchise? they have other games to play! everything Halo 5 tried doing in terms of trendy mobility and map design, tonnes of other games did first and better. Black ops 3, Titanfall, Doom, all did what Halo 5 tried doing in terms of arena based, fast paced action, but they did it arguably better.

Not only is this one of the many decisions that has hurt the franchise in terms of sales, but you’re pushed the fanbase away. Halo used to be a spectacle, a game that could stand out from the crowd, but now it’s a mere shell of what it once was. Many hardcore fans have lost faith in the franchise and its direction, and they’ve left for rather different titles or platforms. 343 need to realise that if they want to maximize popularity within the franchise, they need to cater to the people who actually want to play HALO specifically. The once huge following has diminished, but with the right care and treatment to the games, you can actually bring people back! the franchise isn’t beyond saving.

Take Halo 2A multiplayer for an example of the kind of multiplayer that Halo 6 really needs. It looked visually stunning, and held up with modern graphics and gameplay, yet it played like a Halo game, because it was one. The triangle was there, sprint was not, spartan abilities were not (though my personal opinion is that some spartan abilities like clamber would be a nice addition to the classic gameplay), the maps worked, the content was viable (mostly). Just imagine for a minute, that Halo 2A’s gameplay was not in fact a Halo 2 remastering. Imagine it. THAT is how a modern Halo game SHOULD play, because that’s the exact type of gameplay that made the franchise so spectacular, so beloved. Never once have I seen someone who avidly enjoyed the older games complain about how H2A played. Commonly is MCC too I see H2A being voted for, because the gameplay is that step up from Halo 3 that Halo 4 should’ve been, without all the over the top modernization.

I haven’t quite managed to word this exactly how I wanted, but the core points are there.
Leave your opinions below, but please, even if you are bias towards the new games or old, actually put some thought into your answer, and consider what i’m saying. As a fan of the newer movement mechanics, I made this post trying to be as non-bias as possible, but Halo has suffered immensely because of the changes under 343’s new direction, and I want nothing more than to see this franchise thrive again.

#2

I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.

One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).

On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.

At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet

#3

Completely, 100% agree. Halo used to be a towering giant over the entire video game world, now it’s just another game.

#4

> 2533274901895958;2:
> I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
>
> One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
>
> On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
>
> At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet

Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.

#5

> 2533274855768280;4:
> > 2533274901895958;2:
> > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> >
> > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> >
> > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> >
> > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
>
>
> Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.

Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was ,in 2007.

not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.

Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.

#6

> 2535463261337659;5:
> > 2533274855768280;4:
> > > 2533274901895958;2:
> > > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> > >
> > > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> > >
> > > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> > >
> > > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
> >
> >
> > Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.
>
>
> Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was in 2007.
>
> not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.
>
> Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.

There was the same amount of games in 07 as there is now. Halo was just so huge, unique and good that no one cared about them. 343 forced all of the old players out by tearing apart the franchise they played for a decade, it has nothing to do with age.

#7

I cannot wait the time 343’s decision being affected by Overwatch, game without sprint, being “very popular” on the market.

#8

Have people forgotten the change started with Reach, a Bungie title? 343 just took what Bungie did with Reach and built upon it. Loadouts, armor abilities, sprint, all things introduced in Reach first, before 343 took over

Granted, 343 could have taken Halo back in a familiar direction with 4 and removed those things, which is what they should have done, but my point was to remind people that 343 didn’t start the decline of the franchise

#9

> 2533274793226068;6:
> > 2535463261337659;5:
> > > 2533274855768280;4:
> > > > 2533274901895958;2:
> > > > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> > > >
> > > > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> > > >
> > > > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> > > >
> > > > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
> > >
> > >
> > > Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.
> >
> >
> > Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was in 2007.
> >
> > not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.
> >
> > Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.
>
>
> There was the same amount of games in 07 as there is now. Halo was just so huge, unique and good that no one cared about them. 343 forced all of the old players out by tearing apart the franchise they played for a decade, it has nothing to do with age.

Why am I still here then? I also truly believe even if 343 did recreate a classic halo that everyone would still hate it and call it trash. Doesn’t matter what they do, they won’t be able to please both sides.

#10

> 2533274901895958;2:
> I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
>
> One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
>
> On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
>
> At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet

Skimmed through your post and only one thing really caught my eye. It was when you said vehicular combat disrupted the golden triangle, even though it didn’t. The golden triangle is a set of mechanics that determines how players combat one another on foot. Vehicles don’t break the triangle because it doesn’t apply to them, they are a completely separate part of the sandbox.

Look back at any of the old Bungie vidocs where they mention the golden triangle, and you’ll see its always about player interactions on foot. To think that the golden triangle applies to every single part of Halo is ridiculous.

#11

> 2535463261337659;9:
> > 2533274793226068;6:
> > > 2535463261337659;5:
> > > > 2533274855768280;4:
> > > > > 2533274901895958;2:
> > > > > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> > > > >
> > > > > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> > > > >
> > > > > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was in 2007.
> > >
> > > not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.
> > >
> > > Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.
> >
> >
> > There was the same amount of games in 07 as there is now. Halo was just so huge, unique and good that no one cared about them. 343 forced all of the old players out by tearing apart the franchise they played for a decade, it has nothing to do with age.
>
>
> Why am I still here then? I also truly believe even if 343 did recreate a classic halo that everyone would still hate it and call it trash. Doesn’t matter what they do, they won’t be able to please both sides.

The majority = all, sorry. Not saying it will work, but they need to try something else because everyone with their head on straight can see the numbers, this ain’t working.

#12

> 2533274908070201;8:
> Have people forgotten the change started with Reach, a Bungie title? 343 just took what Bungie did with Reach and built upon it. Loadouts, armor abilities, sprint, all things introduced in Reach first, before 343 took over
>
> Granted, 343 could have taken Halo back in a familiar direction with 4 and removed those things, which is what they should have done, but my point was to remind people that 343 didn’t start the decline of the franchise

Have people forgotten that the community hated the changes Bungie made and didn’t want them continued?

Bungie experimented, yes, but the community made it clear that we didn’t like the changes.so why would we be ok with a new developer pushing those changes even further?

Bungie caused Halo to hit a bump in the road, 343 are the ones who caused it to decline from that point. We’re beyond putting the blame on Bungie and Reach. It’s time people start realizing that and focus on 343 and their games. They are the ones continuing Halos decline, not Bungie and not Reach.

#13

> 2535463261337659;9:
> > 2533274793226068;6:
> > > 2535463261337659;5:
> > > > 2533274855768280;4:
> > > > > 2533274901895958;2:
> > > > > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> > > > >
> > > > > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> > > > >
> > > > > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was in 2007.
> > >
> > > not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.
> > >
> > > Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.
> >
> >
> > There was the same amount of games in 07 as there is now. Halo was just so huge, unique and good that no one cared about them. 343 forced all of the old players out by tearing apart the franchise they played for a decade, it has nothing to do with age.
>
>
> Why am I still here then? I also truly believe even if 343 did recreate a classic halo that everyone would still hate it and call it trash. Doesn’t matter what they do, they won’t be able to please both sides.

Then what have they got to lose? Might as well give classic Halo a shot and see where it goes. If it doesn’t do well, then they can go back to sprint and all that nonsense. Part of me thinks they’re too afraid to do a classic Halo, because of it is successful, it’ll show that they were wrong and the fans of classic Halo were right all along.

#14

> 2533274793226068;6:
> > 2535463261337659;5:
> > > 2533274855768280;4:
> > > > 2533274901895958;2:
> > > > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> > > >
> > > > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> > > >
> > > > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> > > >
> > > > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
> > >
> > >
> > > Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.
> >
> >
> > Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was in 2007.
> >
> > not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.
> >
> > Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.
>
>
> There was the same amount of games in 07 as there is now. Halo was just so huge, unique and good that no one cared about them. 343 forced all of the old players out by tearing apart the franchise they played for a decade, it has nothing to do with age.

Exactly.

#15

> 2535454426512730;7:
> I cannot wait the time 343’s decision being affected by Overwatch, game without sprint, being “very popular” on the market.

Yeah time has dictated, people do like that classic formula of gameplay

#16

> 2533274908070201;8:
> Have people forgotten the change started with Reach, a Bungie title? 343 just took what Bungie did with Reach and built upon it. Loadouts, armor abilities, sprint, all things introduced in Reach first, before 343 took over
>
> Granted, 343 could have taken Halo back in a familiar direction with 4 and removed those things, which is what they should have done, but my point was to remind people that 343 didn’t start the decline of the franchise

While Reach may have been a hit or miss with players, 343’s titles have been much more critically judged. And my point wasn’t a debate about 343 or Bungie, 343 are here now, and that classic formula needs to come back for the franchise to thrive again.

#17

> 2533274793226068;11:
> > 2535463261337659;9:
> > > 2533274793226068;6:
> > > > 2535463261337659;5:
> > > > > 2533274855768280;4:
> > > > > > 2533274901895958;2:
> > > > > > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was in 2007.
> > > >
> > > > not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.
> > > >
> > > > Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.
> > >
> > >
> > > There was the same amount of games in 07 as there is now. Halo was just so huge, unique and good that no one cared about them. 343 forced all of the old players out by tearing apart the franchise they played for a decade, it has nothing to do with age.
> >
> >
> > Why am I still here then? I also truly believe even if 343 did recreate a classic halo that everyone would still hate it and call it trash. Doesn’t matter what they do, they won’t be able to please both sides.
>
>
> The majority = all, sorry. Not saying it will work, but they need to try something else because everyone with their head on straight can see the numbers, this ain’t working.

Very true. Glad other people can accept that the Halo formula right now has crashed with the larger audience.

#18

> 2533274855768280;15:
> > 2535454426512730;7:
> > I cannot wait the time 343’s decision being affected by Overwatch, game without sprint, being “very popular” on the market.
>
>
> Yeah time has dictated, people do like that classic formula of gameplay

Probably it is because almost every shooter on the market was flooded by game with similar movement system and gameplay. Games like Doom and Overwatch must have been fresh and nostalgic experience to most people.

#19

> 2533274814289862;12:
> > 2533274908070201;8:
> > Have people forgotten the change started with Reach, a Bungie title? 343 just took what Bungie did with Reach and built upon it. Loadouts, armor abilities, sprint, all things introduced in Reach first, before 343 took over
> >
> > Granted, 343 could have taken Halo back in a familiar direction with 4 and removed those things, which is what they should have done, but my point was to remind people that 343 didn’t start the decline of the franchise
>
>
> Have people forgotten that the community hated the changes Bungie made and didn’t want them continued?
>
> Bungie experimented, yes, but the community made it clear that we didn’t like the changes.so why would we be ok with a new developer pushing those changes even further?
>
> Bungie caused Halo to hit a bump in the road, 343 are the ones who caused it to decline from that point. We’re beyond putting the blame on Bungie and Reach. It’s time people start realizing that and focus on 343 and their games. They are the ones continuing Halos decline, not Bungie and not Reach.

Too right. Time for change again, but change back to a method that actually works. #MakeHaloGreatAgain

#20

> 2533274814289862;13:
> > 2535463261337659;9:
> > > 2533274793226068;6:
> > > > 2535463261337659;5:
> > > > > 2533274855768280;4:
> > > > > > 2533274901895958;2:
> > > > > > I disagree. I’ve played Halo since way back when (first played H2 in 2006), and I find that Halo 5’s game play is the best to date (I will gladly admit that the campaign was lackluster). The fact is, Halo faces a huge amount more competition now than it ever did during the reign of CE, 2, and 3, and Halo needs to adapt if it wants to survive against this competition. Obviously, there’s no one “right” way of doing this, but there’s also a number of “wrong” ways, stagnancy included. The essential premise is this: Halo must be able to point at any other shooter and say, “Here’s what game X is doing, but we beat it because A) we do it better or B) we’re unique.” I believe Halo has done both.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the worst arguments that I’ve heard anti-Halo 5 players make is that many of the new mechanics disrupt the Golden Triangle. The primary fallacy is that the Golden Triangle has always had disruptions in-game (vehicular combat is a good example), so stating that new mechanics break it really is to state nothing new. While I do think it’s important that Halo base itself on core principles, I think limiting mechanics such that they don’t disrupt things such as the Golden Triangle is a very poor approach as it promotes stale, repetitive game play. Deviations are necessary if you want game play to feel fluid and responsive. Principles such as ease of access and low(er) TTK are much more important to Halo, and Halo 5 does match these–no new mechanic requires extensive practice to use effectively, and often they serve as counters (but not trump cards) to older mechanics which experienced players could exploit to dominate the battlefield. This, based on what I have read in the various threads on the forums, seems to be the real underlying cause of many Halo veterans’ complaints: it makes them adapt, and they do not wish to do so. They expect that their Halo 2 and Halo 3 methods will work for this game, and while they certainly do sometimes, it’s no guarantee. Yes, Halo might lose some older players this way, but it also opens up the series to make it far more accessible to new players who will ultimately constitute the base on which Halo builds its future. Nonetheless, it retains those more-unique traits of accessibility and lower TTK than other games (the next most comparable is Destiny, and even that is a fair bit quicker).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On the side of improvement, Halo has grabbed some mechanics that could really be considered “standard” in a game. For example, Sprint in Halo is an ideal tool for mobility that A) does not completely disrupt combat by allowing people to zip away whenever things go south for them, and B) opens up options for smooth(er) integration of other abilities like Charge. Sprint isn’t a necessity, despite what people claim–at no point do you have to sprint all over a map to play the game. You can lock down a region and just run like you do in previous Halo games, but should you decide to move, you’re no longer a sitting duck as you strut across the map at BMS. This is opposed to other games (I’ll again use Bungie’s most recent brainchild as an example) in which sprinting allows people to step out of combat with no risk of consequence, and often lacks any further integration into the game. Another good example is the Charge mechanic. Yes, I’ll agree that it needs balancing (mostly in the time to ready your gun after charging), but overall the implementation is superior to other games, in which similar mechanics are insta-kills, whereas in Halo, they aren’t unless you manage a beat down, so it gives the victim a fair fighting chance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At the end of the day, though, Halo 5 doesn’t play all that different. It is a natural evolution of the older Halos, which really would be their own sect of Call of Halo if they had not done so. It’s enjoyable, it’s fast, and while I do prefer games like Destiny for their co-op (Halo was a little late to the game with this), Halo’s PvP multiplayer is honestly the best yet
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Whether you disagree or not doesn’t matter, the stats are there. Halo as a franchise has declined massively from sales to players. It’s not that I don’t enjoy some of Halo 5’s features, but the executive decisions that 343 have made, HAVE placed the franchise into a huge state of decline. A problem that the previous titles never had, even when competition was around. “evolving” the game to be just like every other game, will not get you sales.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hey, halo 3 also implemented equipment, and you couldn’t shoot or melee when deploying it. It isn’t because of sprint, it isn’t because of smart scope. Halo is no longer the “giant” it was. It’s not due to new features, rather veterans/fans grow up, and are busy, there’s many more first person shooters nowadays, there’s indie games, and a ton of platforms to play it on, don’t forget mobile games. You can’t expect the population to stay the same it was in 2007.
> > > >
> > > > not only that, but there is also a lot of people that ARE enjoying this game and are not shouting it from the rooftops on a forum. I’ve been around since CE, and I really enjoy halo 5. Honestly, the multiplayer is one of the best. Campaign was really lacking however.
> > > >
> > > > Also, some people may not have purchased the game/dropped it as there is a new developer and their loyalties are with bungie.
> > >
> > >
> > > There was the same amount of games in 07 as there is now. Halo was just so huge, unique and good that no one cared about them. 343 forced all of the old players out by tearing apart the franchise they played for a decade, it has nothing to do with age.
> >
> >
> > Why am I still here then? I also truly believe even if 343 did recreate a classic halo that everyone would still hate it and call it trash. Doesn’t matter what they do, they won’t be able to please both sides.
>
>
> Then what have they got to lose? Might as well give classic Halo a shot and see where it goes. If it doesn’t do well, then they can go back to sprint and all that nonsense. Part of me thinks they’re too afraid to do a classic Halo, because of it is successful, it’ll show that they were wrong and the fans of classic Halo were right all along.

It does often times feel like 343 can’t swallow their pride. I get they wanted to try make Halo their own, but the audience doesn’t want that, we just want a good Halo game, which we previously had the formula for nailed down to a pinpoint.