> The game took reach as a starting point to improve upon and expound upon, but reach was a radical departure from the true halo that got so popular
>
> all this AA, perc, loadout, exp system to unlock stuff(now even to unlock gameplay changing stuff), score-instead-of-kill crap is not halo
>
> thats stuff from cod era reach which was a failure …so then they add more weird non-halo elements
>
> i just get sick of this “evolution” excuse when its clearly pandering to a player base that are cod fans
>
>
> …i still cant believe i had to unlock my old emblem and had to unlock the br
As time goes on people grow older and starts losing interests in new ideas and refuse to accept changes to things that they held so dear in their younger years.
Changes will always be made and they can’t all please you to a 100%.
I don’t get how halo 4 is reach2. It kept AA’s from reach. The DMR. and sprint. What else did they keep from reach? You can’t say new things as an excuse because every game has new things.
Also it plays nothing like reach. It plays like a hybrid of halo 3 and halo reach making it its own game.
I agree, Halo 4 is Reach 2… but that isn’t really a bad thing. Halo 3 was great because of the custom games and skill rank, two things lacking in Halo 4. Everything is close to perfect.
They released it too early, it should have came with the rank system and custom games needs improving. Not only that but, general features are lacking such as the play lists sucking. No good FFA, and no fun modes other than flood, like rocket race/VIP etc.
> - -
> Well, anyway, if you want to make a criticism, at least have a point to back it up separate from just saying it is non-Halo.
If you’d say this to any of the more specific arguments you would be like, but questioning why things such as kill-streaks and such are not Halo is very obvious and you should know it as well - not a single Halo game before Halo 4 had these features.
> Testing
> - testing
> - testing
>
>
> Well, anyway, if you want to make a criticism, at least have a point to back it up separate from just saying it is non-Halo.
what do you mean? that is the point …halo4 has elements in the game that dramatically separate it characteristically from the core of the series …enough to the point where simply having enjoyed the previous games is not enough of a requisite to enjoy this game …if you played cod however …there are certain feature sets that are present in halo 4 designed to make you feel comfortable
taking out custom game options, 4skbr (halo) putting in legitimate percs, killstreaks and killcams (non-halo) <–an example
> > - -
> > Well, anyway, if you want to make a criticism, at least have a point to back it up separate from just saying it is non-Halo.
>
> If you’d say this to any of the more specific arguments you would be like, but questioning why things such as kill-streaks and such are not Halo is very obvious and you should know it as well - <mark>not a single Halo game before Halo 4 had these features</mark>.
>
> I think it’s safe to say it’s not Halo.
halo CE didn’t have duel wielding or the BR or smg ETC that halo 2 had. There for halo 2 was not halo.
> > > - -
> > > Well, anyway, if you want to make a criticism, at least have a point to back it up separate from just saying it is non-Halo.
> >
> > If you’d say this to any of the more specific arguments you would be like, but questioning why things such as kill-streaks and such are not Halo is very obvious and you should know it as well - <mark>not a single Halo game before Halo 4 had these features</mark>.
> >
> > I think it’s safe to say it’s not Halo.
>
> halo CE didn’t have duel wielding or the BR or smg ETC that halo 2 had. There for halo 2 was not halo.
>
> Gotta love your logic.
They never use logic, what are you talking about?
I’ve pointed this fact out that each Halo game has changed in some way to the next completely changing the way it’s played.
> > > - -
> > > Well, anyway, if you want to make a criticism, at least have a point to back it up separate from just saying it is non-Halo.
> >
> > If you’d say this to any of the more specific arguments you would be like, but questioning why things such as kill-streaks and such are not Halo is very obvious and you should know it as well - <mark>not a single Halo game before Halo 4 had these features</mark>.
> >
> > I think it’s safe to say it’s not Halo.
>
> halo CE didn’t have duel wielding or the BR or smg ETC that halo 2 had. There for halo 2 was not halo.
>
> Gotta love your logic.
the both of you are being illogical because you both are treating every new feature like its the same sort of thing because its a new feature …what if they added a pink pony as a new vehicle? …is that cool because its a new feature and every halo game has had new features ? no …because pink ponies arent “halo”…and if there wasnt a such thing as a distinct “halo” then it wouldnt have the fans that it does and there would be no way to formulate expectations because every new game would just be a random combo of features …there is a reason they didnt have lightsabers in lord of the rings
…im looking at feature by feature on its own merits not all of them for the sake that they are new
I sincerely apologize for wanting to have a discussion on the halo 4 forum about halo 4…thank you though for your constructive contribution to the thread …
> what if they added a pink pony as a new vehicle? …is that cool because its a new feature and every halo game has had new features ? <mark>no …because pink ponies arent “halo”…</mark>
I remember when I used to think like you, I hated reach with a passion and still do, but that was more so because the game mechanics in Reach were implemented horribly. In Halo 4 the mechanics are much more bearable and all in all the game is much better than Reach. Sure it’s not perfect, but with a few tweaks it could truly become a fantastic game.
It was nothing more than a typical Microsoft attempt to make more money. They went after COD players expecting that they’d hang on to most of the Halo guys at the same time. Case closed.
