Its not because 343 is trying to turn halo into the next modern warfare. Its not because 343 are all secretly CoD fans. And it is most certainly not that 343 is part of some vast conspiracy to turn Halo into another “generic” military shooter that everyone will forget about after the next CoD is released.
The reason many fans on these forums “cry CoD” is that 343 has made a number of changes to the game that look like things that have been implemented in other shooters, the most popular of which being from the CoD series. Many claim that 343 is trying to copy CoD, but I believe that is not the case. And here is why:
There is nothing wrong with borrowing concepts from other games and implementing them in your own way. That is actually the biggest part of how most “new” things develop over time. Apple didn’t magically create the first iPhone out of thin air. They took ideas from other existing devices (not all of them from apple) and simply made it better. 343 is trying to do the same thing with halo 4.
And what is wrong with 343 trying to attract more fans to the series? Halo is growing. At its core is the 10 (soon to be 11) year old game many of the older members of the community know and love (Halo CE). In every game that has come out since, new ideas have been added. People always complained, some fans always got so mad that they left the series and never came back. It is bound to happen. But that is no reason for 343 to halt their progress.
Halo has always made rather remarkable changes to the sandbox between games. Dual-wielding and vehicle jacking in Halo 2, Equipment, theater, and Forge in Halo 3, Firefight and VISR in ODST, AA’s in Reach, and now MANY things in halo 4. Halo began with “Combat Evolved”, and with every game in the series it has built a tradition living up to that name. There is no reason to break that tradition now.
Im not writing this to try and stop people from complaining. I’m just trying to put out another way of looking at things, and hope that at least a few people might agree… or change my mind. That can be fun too, in a way. Anyone care to try?
There is NO CoD in Halo. CoD was not the first game to come up with a customisable system or exp levelling up. If CoD is the only game you can associate with Halo then you really need to buy a larger variety of games.
All 343 has done is allowed players to customise their characters to a larger extent.
> Halo has always made rather remarkable changes to the sandbox between games. Dual-wielding and vehicle jacking in Halo 2, Equipment, theater, and Forge in Halo 3, Firefight and VISR in ODST, AA’s in Reach, and now MANY things in halo 4. Halo began with “Combat Evolved”, and with every game in the series it has built a tradition living up to that name. There is no reason to break that tradition now.
> > I don’t like playing Call of Duty though :<
>
> But its not Call of Duty…
>
> They are different games, and it’s wrong to say they are the same.
I’m not saying Halo 4 is Call of Duty. I’m saying I don’t like how Call of Duty plays, so why would I enjoy 343 making Halo more CoD-esque? Which they have. To try and dispute that at this point in time just puts a grin on peoples’ face.
I don’t care where Halo 4 borrows things from, whether it’s CoD or whatever. I’m all for changes. But! Halo series should always have one thing unchanged: being an arena shooter. I enjoyed every game in the series, even Reach. But now I have huge concerns about Halo 4 MP.
> There is NO CoD in Halo. CoD was not the first game to come up with a customisable system or exp levelling up. If CoD is the only game you can associate with Halo then you really need to buy a larger variety of games.
>
> All 343 has done is allowed players to customise their characters to a larger extent.
Exactly. Only CoD is one of the most popular games so many people will try to compare other games with it. If you wanted I could list at least half a dozen different games with features that could be considered “similar” to some of those added in Halo 4.
The only reason I put CoD in the title is because it is what most people are using for the comparison… and because it acts as a nice magnet for views while still being relevant to the topic =)
Why would you say “secretly”? I’m sure if you ask anyone at the studio if they are fans of the Call of Duty series, they would say “yes”. It’s not a bad thing that they are CoD fans. I love CoD and if Halo is taking a direction towards CoD, I’m fine with that. It’s like taking a mountain of Halo ice cream and adding some CoD sprinkles on top!
> Why would you say “secretly”? I’m sure if you ask anyone at the studio if they are fans of the Call of Duty series, they would say “yes”. It’s not a bad thing that they are CoD fans. I love CoD and if Halo is taking a direction towards CoD, I’m fine with that. It’s like taking a mountain of Halo ice cream and adding some CoD sprinkles on top!
It’s like jabbing an armadillo egg into your homemade vanilla ice cream.
Two very different things that shouldn’t be combined.
> > > I don’t like playing Call of Duty though :<
> >
> > But its not Call of Duty…
> >
> > They are different games, and it’s wrong to say they are the same.
>
> I’m not saying Halo 4 is Call of Duty. I’m saying I don’t like how Call of Duty plays, so why would I enjoy 343 making Halo more CoD-esque? Which they have. To try and dispute that at this point in time just puts a grin on peoples’ face.
How have they? I dont see anything similar to a nuke or an AC 130.
I dont see fully customizable guns with different attachments.
I dont see 50 different guns that barely differ from one another.
I dont see a throwing knife of any sort.
I dont see a remote control car with C4 on it.
There’s alot of Call of Duty I do not see.
You may aswell start comparing Halo to everything else aswell.
I see a bit of Unreal Tournament, some Aliens vs. Predator, some Rainbowsix,
some battlefield, some Metroid, some goldeneye etc.
If you really want to get into the details, half of what Call of Duty does has been done since 1998 anyways by various other games, which predates even Halo.
Every shooter borrows concepts from one another. Its shortsighted to say Halo is CoD-esque considering a vast majority of CoD’s core features are non-existent.
> > There is nothing wrong with borrowing concepts from other games and implementing them in your own way.
>
> There is a problem with borrowing concepts from a terrible game and implementing them into a wonderful game though.
CoD is not a terrible game. CoD sells millions of games so it can’t be a terrible game. Furthermore customisable players is not a CoD concept as CoD did not use it first and there are hundreds of other games which use the same idea.
> > > There is nothing wrong with borrowing concepts from other games and implementing them in your own way.
> >
> > There is a problem with borrowing concepts from a terrible game and implementing them into a wonderful game though.
>
> CoD is not a terrible game. CoD sells millions of games so it can’t be a terrible game. Furthermore customisable players is not a CoD concept as CoD did not use it first and there are hundreds of other games which use the same idea.
Such as games like Rainbowsix which have been around since the 90’s
Ultimately it’s how games evolve. I don’t think I would want to play another game that just used the same set of features as previous Halo games, as much as I love them.
Call of Duty has been a massively influential game for all Genres, just as Halo has been. Some of the things that have been adopted by other games have been adopted because they work very well, make the game more fun or solve some gameplay issues.
Regenerating health was a massive game changer for FPS, something that COD “stole” from Halo, along with everyone else. Why, because it worked really well and sped up big gun fights.
A dedicated button for grenades was something that Halo also popularised, something also used in COD and countless other FPS’s since. Why? Because it worked really well.
So what if Halo 4 has a system similar to the perks system? The perks system and unlocks has is a tried and tested mechanic that really varies games and also provides incentive to play the game more.
We’d seen the same thing in singleplayer games for years prior to COD, I don’t know why it’s so frowned upon that Halo might use it.
Besides, customisation is always good, tailoring your character to the way you play the game, how can that be a bad thing. Everyone love having different armour in Halo 3, so is it so bizarre that you can now customise your weapons?
Nobody complained that Halo ripped off Goldeneye 007, because it had a sniper rifle!
> > > There is nothing wrong with borrowing concepts from other games and implementing them in your own way.
> >
> > There is a problem with borrowing concepts from a terrible game and implementing them into a wonderful game though.
>
> CoD is not a terrible game. CoD sells millions of games so it can’t be a terrible game. Furthermore customizable players is not a CoD concept as CoD did not use it first and there are hundreds of other games which use the same idea.
CoD is too a terrible game. It may have sold a million copies of all of it’s game, but the way it plays compared to Halo is terrible. The idea of letting you customize classes isn’t a good idea in my opinion, I preferred Halo over every other fps because it set an equal playing ground for all the players (in a sense) new or experienced. CoD and other games just makes it unfair, having extremely over power guns and attachments at certain ranks. Letting Halo allow player to start with a DMR or a BR instead of picking it up is unfair to new player, since all they have is a assault rifle and a pistol when others have 4 of each grenade and a precision weapons. They made the weapon spawns randomized “To make it more fair for new players”, but how does letting a guy start with plasma grenades and a BR make it fair for new players?
> Ultimately it’s how games evolve. I don’t think I would want to play another game that just used the same set of features as previous Halo games, as much as I love them.
>
> Call of Duty has been a massively influential game for all Genres, just as Halo has been. Some of the things that have been adopted by other games have been adopted because they work very well, make the game more fun or solve some gameplay issues.
>
> Regenerating health was a massive game changer for FPS, something that COD “stole” from Halo, along with everyone else. Why, because it worked really well and sped up big gun fights.
>
> A dedicated button for grenades was something that Halo also popularised, something also used in COD and countless other FPS’s since. Why? Because it worked really well.
>
> So what if Halo 4 has a system similar to the perks system? The perks system and unlocks has is a tried and tested mechanic that really varies games and also provides incentive to play the game more.
> We’d seen the same thing in singleplayer games for years prior to COD, I don’t know why it’s so frowned upon that Halo might use it.
> Besides, customisation is always good, tailoring your character to the way you play the game, how can that be a bad thing. Everyone love having different armour in Halo 3, so is it so bizarre that you can now customise your weapons?
>
>
>
> Nobody complained that Halo ripped off Goldeneye 007, because it had a sniper rifle!
Good mechanics.
Not gimmicky unbalanced mechanics that are rehashed and do not enhance gameplay.