Why do some fans claim Halo "Needs to Evolve"?

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

During the classic era of Halo, Bungie never made any changes just for the sake of changing… At least, not any that I know of.

This minority of individuals—at least that’s what they seem to be—need to realize that what’s worse than MORE of the same is LESS of the same. Change for the sake of change, or to appease a totally different fanbase—one Halo has been in competition with for years now marketively—is so destructive to a game and its majority community that doing it once is pretty unforgivable, but doing it twice, is pure heresy.

When Bungie developed Halo 2 and 3, they introduced new mechanics but kept true to the foundation that was Halo: CE. Reach was a miss by around half (give or take) of the community’s standards, but after a while it did well. However, it didn’t come really close to the level either of its predecessors did. Halo 2 and 3 were titans in the industry during their release and the many years following. Now, we have a broken Halo 4 that seemed to stem from a Halo and CoD game trying to reproduce, followed by a very buggy and incomplete remake of the 3 legendary Halo games and Halo 4, and upcoming the community is receiving a Halo game that seems to be the nail in the coffin for a FPS that has separated itself from the generic and overused flavors that CoD and other mainstream FPS’s have been for years now.

343, with all due respect, it seems as if you’re digging your own grave. I can’t say I’m sad to see the way this franchise is dying due to how badly it is that you’ve decided to take this game to a CoD and possibly even Titanfall level, at least from all the reviews I’ve read and observations I’ve made.

Additionally, I am no gaming analyst, but it’s been over 2 years and it seems that you still won’t listen to the majority. You have your company so split that it seems you won’t be able to finish fixing the MCC and release a Halo that the majority of Halo (and maybe even Xbox) fans want.

I am a person of 2nd chances. With Halo 4, you dropped the ball. And with the MCC, you screwed the pooch. I preordered the MCC thinking you learned from your mistakes. I admit, I fell for the hype train. However, Halo has been Xbox’s flagship for over a decade. It seems that you guys are going to be the ones who destroy Halo’s status as its console flagship.

I hope you guys can fix the MCC by the time I’ll be able to enjoy it, but even if you do, I’m taking a pledge to not preorder and possibly not even purchase Halo 5: Guardians. Until you guys learn that change for the sake of change is extremely detrimental to Halo’s success, and until you guys learn that Bungie’s model of change is what Halo needs for actual healthy evolution, my pledge will stand.

Lastly, as far as Bungie’s model of evolution goes, all it takes is some quick glances. Halo 2 had dual-wielding, skill-level-matching, and clan skirmish support. Halo 3 introduced Forge and equipment. I may have left some stuff out but that was to be concise here because by now, you get the point.

Edit: I am not trying to speak for anyone. Most of these observations are mine, but don’t be surprised if many others feel the exact same way. Because I certainly know… I’ve seen an overwhelming amount of displeasure from this community since Halo 4 released.

2

343i seems to actually have a lack of respect for the history of the game. All the iconic sounds and visuals changed for no real reason. 10 years from now people will buy another Halo 2 remake. Their will be almost no market for a Halo 4 or Halo 5 remake. Totally uninspired garb with serious finical backing. Turd polishing.

3

Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that? It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable. Halo doesn’t necessarily need to change, but there’s nothing wrong with it doing so.

4

> 2533274833380875;3:
> Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that? It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable. Halo doesn’t necessarily need to change, but there’s nothing wrong with it doing so.

Unless you are a junky for classic game play. I want a new Halo game. I would have liked to have seen a more natural progression in the evolution. Halo 3 to Reach and Halo Reach to Halo 4 were both jarring. As a result I think we ended up with a largely forgettable multi player experience.

Make no mistake, I want change. But that change should embrace the history of the series. That change should attempt to alter some of the fundamental elements that built the series.

Much like Halo 4, the Halo 5 beta is fantastic. I just wish it wasn’t called Halo.

5

> 2533274833380875;3:
> Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that? It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable. Halo doesn’t necessarily need to change, but there’s nothing wrong with it doing so.

If new halo games play differently than halo, then why should they be called halo?

6

Apperently nobody wants to play a game with classic halo gameplay.

Even though millions cry out for it and every time they try to “modernise” it the online population drops so fast and so hard its amazing.

7

You can’t speak for Bungie either. You don’t know what they would do today. Halo would probably feel like Destiny if they made it today. Regardless, I remember people complaining about Reach all the time. It was all about getting rid of armor abilities because it didn’t feel like Halo. Even Halo 3 got that for the equipment. People don’t like change.

Everyone always says about their favorite band “Their first albums the best”.

8

Halo: Reach did really well. What made it truly lose its population was 343i.

9

> 2533274833380875;3:
> Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that? It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable. Halo doesn’t necessarily need to change, but there’s nothing wrong with it doing so.

But that’s no excuse to alienate the majority of the players—the ones that have been here since Halo 1, 2, 3, and to an extent even Reach. That’s why it’s wrong. Now this community is so fractured because you have so many veterans who want the old Halo formula back, but on the other hand you have this other community, who I might admit is growing, albeit little by little, trying to excuse these changes that the “other side” thinks is complete mediocrity.

I’m sorry to make this sound like an “us vs. them” type of deal, but the developers opened this door. And it’s certainly wrong for ANY game to change, not just Halo, if it necessarily doesn’t need to change, which you even admitted yourself.

Also, I lol’d @ the part where you said the classics are readily playable. There are still thousands if not tens of thousands complaining of the MCC’s horrible functionality.

10

> 2533274825353387;8:
> Halo: Reach did really well. What made it truly lose its population was 343i.

Um no. Reach’s online population dropped really fast too.

11

Evolve is just a buzzword, I tend to just immediately tune out what anyone is saying the moment they throw that around.

All games “evolve”. Every single one does, including the original trilogy games. That doesn’t mean they “improve”.

> Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that?

There’s a difference between wanting the game to play different, and making absurd claims like “the game needs to do __” in order to validate your own wants.

I personally want a classic Halo game, but I’m not here saying “DA GAME NEEDS TO REGRESS”.

My problem isn’t with Halo 4 fanboys (even though I’m not particularly fond of them), my problem is with people pulling this thought-terminating -Yoink- constantly.

> It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable.

The unspoken assumption is that people only want an exact replica of an old game.
Which should obviously be false to anyone trying to be even remotely objective about this dilemma we’re in.

12

> 2533274837952016;9:
> > 2533274833380875;3:
> > Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that? It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable. Halo doesn’t necessarily need to change, but there’s nothing wrong with it doing so.
>
>
> But that’s no excuse to alienate the majority of the players—the ones that have been here since Halo 1, 2, 3, and to an extent even Reach.

And it does alienate them. I have friends that are new to Halo (Halo 3). They played 3 and Reach. Halo 4 came out and they said “it’s just a different game”. Everyone claims that Halo NEEDS to change. A lot of good that has done so far. My guess is 343i will play around for another title or two until we finally go back. Even then, the Bungie charm will forever be gone. We may always be stuck with 343i’s uninspired stock fps sci-fi art design.

13

> 2661949065465166;4:
> > 2533274833380875;3:
> > Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that? It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable. Halo doesn’t necessarily need to change, but there’s nothing wrong with it doing so.
>
>
> Unless you are a junky for classic game play. I want a new Halo game. I would have liked to have seen a more natural progression in the evolution. Halo 3 to Reach and Halo Reach to Halo 4 were both jarring. As a result I think we ended up with a largely forgettable multi player experience.
>
> Make no mistake, I want change. But that change should embrace the history of the series. That change should attempt to alter some of the fundamental elements that built the series.
>
> Much like Halo 4, the Halo 5 beta is fantastic. I just wish it wasn’t called Halo.

Perhaps from an actual gameplay perspective, but ideally it shouldn’t be jarring at all. Armor abilities were just a natural evolution of equipment (with Bungie even copying the bubble shield over) so that they would be useable at all times instead of just power ups lite. In Halo 4 they added more of them and introduced sprint as a new
“Spartan Ability”.

But I don’t get what’s wrong with calling it Halo. I don’t know about you, but I hate it when games take place in the same universe and use different names for it. Unless you’re suggesting this just be a whole new game universe, but that’s just a hopeless wish. I’m not trying to insult you, but 343 is tasked with creating new Halo games, not a new product.

14

Bad players just want the game to change because they have this delusional belief that they will all of a sudden become good at it.

15

All I want is a new halo game whos gameplay is functional on wizard, midship and guardian. (And not giant versions of them.)

If a halo game cannot even physically be played on quintessential halo maps then theres an issue.

Reach, h4 and now h5 cannot function on any of those maps.

16

> 2533274833380875;13:
> > 2661949065465166;4:
> > > 2533274833380875;3:
> > > Because some people want Halo to play differently. What’s so wrong with that? It’s not like the old games are abandoned or forgotten. All of them are now on the Xbox One and readily playable. Halo doesn’t necessarily need to change, but there’s nothing wrong with it doing so.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Unless you are a junky for classic game play. I want a new Halo game. I would have liked to have seen a more natural progression in the evolution. Halo 3 to Reach and Halo Reach to Halo 4 were both jarring. As a result I think we ended up with a largely forgettable multi player experience.
> >
> > Make no mistake, I want change. But that change should embrace the history of the series. That change should attempt to alter some of the fundamental elements that built the series.
> >
> > Much like Halo 4, the Halo 5 beta is fantastic. I just wish it wasn’t called Halo.
>
>
>
> Perhaps from an actual gameplay perspective, but ideally it shouldn’t be jarring at all. Armor abilities were just a natural evolution of equipment (with Bungie even copying the bubble shield over) so that they would be useable at all times instead of just power ups lite. In Halo 4 they added more of them and introduced sprint as a new
> “Spartan Ability”.
>
> But I don’t get what’s wrong with calling it Halo. I don’t know about you, but I hate it when games take place in the same universe and use different names for it. Unless you’re suggesting this just be a whole new game universe, but that’s just a hopeless wish. I’m not trying to insult you, but 343 is tasked with creating new Halo games, not a new product.

AAs were jarring because the were poorly designed and we spawned with them. (unbalanced starts are bad in Halo) The other jarring change was the addition of bloom. It is a fundamentally flawed idea. It creates gray area. It just didn’t work.

Halo 4 took weapons off the map. This killed verity. It also meant I ran out of ammo ALL THE TIME. Ordinance handed out power weapons for almost no reason. It also had a point growth for subsequent drops so that a dominate player would, at best, get one extra drop. Usually with only a few kills to go. CTF was altered. Assault was removed.

Both games felt competitively flawed. Obviously I am not alone as the series continues it’s identity crisis.

They are creating a new product that sells only because of the name.

17

> 2535471367604642;15:
> All I want is a new halo game whos gameplay is functional on wizard, midship and guardian. (And not giant versions of them.)
>
> If a halo game cannot even physically be played on quintessential halo maps then theres an issue.

All of Halo’s current problems summed up so well in just two sentences.

18

> 2533274950067759;14:
> Bad players just want the game to change because they have this delusional belief that they will all of a sudden become good at it.

I don’t believe that. I think it’s more that they don’t really apprciate the subtle strategy involved in the early game. They don’t get/see it. So the game is deemed boring. I see how some think AAs helped. Most just don’t tear the game apart like some of us do.

19

> 2533274837952016;1:
> During the classic era of Halo, Bungie never made any changes just for the sake of changing…

You lost all credibility with this sentence here.

Between Halo: CE and Halo 2 Bungie added dual-wielding of weapons, the Fuel Rod Cannon became a weapon, Rocket Launchers received Lock On, Ghosts received the boost ability as did Wraiths, The Banshee lost the Banshee Bomb ability in multiplayer, we got to play from an Elite perspective (The Arbiter) during campaign, we received the ability to highjack vehicles and to beat down the drivers of tanks or drop grenades into them to destroy them. Banshees also got Boost and aerial acrobatic abilities. Online Multiplayer support and function via Xbox Live also became a thing with Clan Functions.

Between Halo 2 and Halo 3, we received equipment abilities, new brute vehicles, new brute weapons, the gravity hammer was introduced, multiplayer sucked for a long time due to bad netcode, true multiplayer customization was introduced with armor permutations not just for Spartans but also for Elites, we also received the ability for melee based weapons like swords to clash, and the Plasma Pistol received its EMP ability to disable vehicles. The hornet was also introduced as well as the Mongoose and Spartan Laser. Also we gained two new grenade types, the Spike Grenade and the Napalm Grenade. Additionally we gained two unique empty spaces to produce Forge Maps, as well as the Forge system being implemented.

Between Halo 3 and Halo 3: ODST, we received a new campaign, a few silenced weapons, and while gaining the unique perspective of playing as an ODST, we also gained Firefight.

Between Halo 3 and Halo: Reach, we received a massive amount of customization options, assassination animations were included as an additional mechanic to increase the “cool factor” of getting the jump on someone from behind. We also more famously/infamously received armor abilities, adding a host of new gameplay options, we also gained a huge new Forge World. Many new weapons, settings, and of course Invasion Mode were added.

All of these things were Bungie, stop living in a fantasy world and please come back to reality. The reality is that each Halo game, one after the next, was completely different from its predecessor, and each time after time again the community complained and whined and rages on about it!

You kids don’t know what the hell it is you want!

20

> 2533274824466008;19:
> > 2533274837952016;1:
> >

Everything you just listed was an addition with a purpose, not change for the sake of change.