Why should I continue to pay halo?

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

…is a rhetorical question that i’ve started to ask myself and I hope 343 are asking themselves too. THIS IS NOT A HATE THREAD.
It would be a bit pointless of me to say that halo 4 lacked play-ability since its been mentioned so many times, but the fact remains that the fanbase of halo (including myself) have been let down immensely.
Now I still believe, along with many, that the next-gen of console could be the answer to a lot of the problems, but that’s still no reassurance.

I’ve been a fan of halo since halo 3. Now that may not have had the best multiplayer, or forge or campaign ect., but it certainly ranked high up as an all rounder. I played halo 3 because players weren’t limited to being infantry (like cod) you could get into vehicles, i played it because the campaign introduced a universe to me that was (for me, then) on a par with star wars, i played halo because you could MAKE YOUR OWN MAPS!.

Why should I play halo 4? Well I’ve not played halo 4 since 26/07/13, and even then it was forge/customs.

What made halo original is no longer here. The multiplayer only cuts average (at the very most) - battlefield has vehilces, a bigger player count and better gameplay. Map building is not unique to halo (for console), and the campaign has yet to draw me back. There is no competitive side to halo and forge has made little improvement since reach.

Again, the next-gen console may be the answer to these problems, be i’m still not reassured.
I’m all for having the game delayed until 2015 like some have suggested, but I feel like i need some feedback from 343, to give me a reason to stick around.

Halo needs something unique, and to fill in the gaps from previous games (features such as firefight and improved theatre). I need a reason to stick around.

…rant over.

2

With that atitude you might as well go play Battlefield. If you really like Halo you wouldn’t be struggling with these questions. Have some hope, 343i knows they made mistakes and they claim to know what the players want. There’s no doubt Halo took a step back, the drop in the population proves it and 343i aren’t blind. They know things need to change again or Halo will never return to the forefront.

The next Halo will undoubtedly support competitive gaming and it will definitely improve on Forge and Custom Games (which were greatly hindered in Halo 4) as these were the primary issues players had with the game. The rest, mostly the Campaign, is bound to improve with the hardware. I think we’re going to see more consistently good visuals as well as a return to the huge battles in Halo 3 (maybe the Scarab will return as well) and a much needed upgrade to the enemies. The story is headed in an interesting place, mostly because we only have vague hints as to where it is going. It’s like a new beginning, and it’s bound to be fresh and interesting.

Halo 5 will be better than Halo 4 in every way, no doubt. Will it be as good as the original trilogy? Maybe not, but it will definitely be a good game. Halo 5 will mark the series’ last chance at regaining its audience, and it will be great to see what 343i musters in attempt to do just that.

You ask why you should buy the next Halo. You should do it because it will be a legitimate Halo game. It will return to its roots at least in some aspects (even if Infinity remains at the center) and it will be a truly next generation Halo game. If that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.

3

> If you really like Halo you wouldn’t be struggling with these questions.

>.<

The fact that there are questions shows concern.

Questions are common in the scientific community and become major seeds [contributions] that eventually produce results.

4

> > If you really like Halo you wouldn’t be struggling with these questions.
>
> >.<
>
> The fact that there are questions shows concern.
>
> Questions are common in the scientific community and become major seeds [contributions] that eventually produce results.

Yes, but asking questions such as “Why should I even care about the next Halo?” are counter-productive. You should care because it’s Halo, and it’s only bound to get better.

5

> With that atitude you might as well go play Battlefield. If you really like Halo you wouldn’t be struggling with these questions. Have some hope, 343i knows they made mistakes and they claim to know what the players want. There’s no doubt Halo took a step back, the drop in the population proves it and 343i aren’t blind. They know things need to change again or Halo will never return to the forefront.
>
> The next Halo will undoubtedly support competitive gaming and it will definitely improve on Forge and Custom Games (which were greatly hindered in Halo 4) as these were the primary issues players had with the game. The rest, mostly the Campaign, is bound to improve with the hardware. I think we’re going to see more consistently good visuals as well as a return to the huge battles in Halo 3 (maybe the Scarab will return as well) and a much needed upgrade to the enemies. The story is headed in an interesting place, mostly because we only have vague hints as to where it is going. It’s like a new beginning, and it’s bound to be fresh and interesting.
>
> Halo 5 will be better than Halo 4 in every way, no doubt. Will it be as good as the original trilogy? Maybe not, but it will definitely be a good game. Halo 5 will mark the series’ last chance at regaining its audience, and it will be great to see what 343i musters in attempt to do just that.
>
> You ask why you should buy the next Halo. You should do it because it will be a legitimate Halo game. It will return to its roots at least in some aspects (even if Infinity remains at the center) and it will be a truly next generation Halo game. If that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.

I’ve never seen so many blind (and wrong) assumptions in a post before.

OT: You shouldn’t. There are too many good games now and in the future for people to bother with a series that keeps cutting features and deviating from the things that made it good.

6

> > With that atitude you might as well go play Battlefield. If you really like Halo you wouldn’t be struggling with these questions. Have some hope, 343i knows they made mistakes and they claim to know what the players want. There’s no doubt Halo took a step back, the drop in the population proves it and 343i aren’t blind. They know things need to change again or Halo will never return to the forefront.
> >
> > The next Halo will undoubtedly support competitive gaming and it will definitely improve on Forge and Custom Games (which were greatly hindered in Halo 4) as these were the primary issues players had with the game. The rest, mostly the Campaign, is bound to improve with the hardware. I think we’re going to see more consistently good visuals as well as a return to the huge battles in Halo 3 (maybe the Scarab will return as well) and a much needed upgrade to the enemies. The story is headed in an interesting place, mostly because we only have vague hints as to where it is going. It’s like a new beginning, and it’s bound to be fresh and interesting.
> >
> > Halo 5 will be better than Halo 4 in every way, no doubt. Will it be as good as the original trilogy? Maybe not, but it will definitely be a good game. Halo 5 will mark the series’ last chance at regaining its audience, and it will be great to see what 343i musters in attempt to do just that.
> >
> > You ask why you should buy the next Halo. You should do it because it will be a legitimate Halo game. It will return to its roots at least in some aspects (even if Infinity remains at the center) and it will be a truly next generation Halo game. If that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.
>
> I’ve never seen so many blind (and wrong) assumptions in a post before.
>
> OT: You shouldn’t. There are too many good games now and in the future for people to bother with a series that keeps cutting features and deviating from the things that made it good.

Ironic how you make blind and incorrect assumptions on 343 and halo 5 despite halo 4 being their first game. Plus if they is so many games that you no longer care why are you here?

7

> > > With that atitude you might as well go play Battlefield. If you really like Halo you wouldn’t be struggling with these questions. Have some hope, 343i knows they made mistakes and they claim to know what the players want. There’s no doubt Halo took a step back, the drop in the population proves it and 343i aren’t blind. They know things need to change again or Halo will never return to the forefront.
> > >
> > > The next Halo will undoubtedly support competitive gaming and it will definitely improve on Forge and Custom Games (which were greatly hindered in Halo 4) as these were the primary issues players had with the game. The rest, mostly the Campaign, is bound to improve with the hardware. I think we’re going to see more consistently good visuals as well as a return to the huge battles in Halo 3 (maybe the Scarab will return as well) and a much needed upgrade to the enemies. The story is headed in an interesting place, mostly because we only have vague hints as to where it is going. It’s like a new beginning, and it’s bound to be fresh and interesting.
> > >
> > > Halo 5 will be better than Halo 4 in every way, no doubt. Will it be as good as the original trilogy? Maybe not, but it will definitely be a good game. Halo 5 will mark the series’ last chance at regaining its audience, and it will be great to see what 343i musters in attempt to do just that.
> > >
> > > You ask why you should buy the next Halo. You should do it because it will be a legitimate Halo game. It will return to its roots at least in some aspects (even if Infinity remains at the center) and it will be a truly next generation Halo game. If that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.
> >
> > I’ve never seen so many blind (and wrong) assumptions in a post before.
> >
> > OT: You shouldn’t. There are too many good games now and in the future for people to bother with a series that keeps cutting features and deviating from the things that made it good.
>
> Ironic how you make blind and incorrect assumptions on 343 and halo 5 despite halo 4 being their first game. Plus if they is so many games that you no longer care why are you here?

343 is made up of people who have years of industry experience as it pertains to their disciplines. It might be their first attempt at Halo, but that’s not an excuse for paid professionals who have worked on other projects before.

I make no assumptions because common sense makes it obvious that competitive gaming is not going to be the forefront of multiplayer now or ever. If you or anyone is madly in love with 343, then I certainly don’t expect that to be clear.

8

> > > > With that atitude you might as well go play Battlefield. If you really like Halo you wouldn’t be struggling with these questions. Have some hope, 343i knows they made mistakes and they claim to know what the players want. There’s no doubt Halo took a step back, the drop in the population proves it and 343i aren’t blind. They know things need to change again or Halo will never return to the forefront.
> > > >
> > > > The next Halo will undoubtedly support competitive gaming and it will definitely improve on Forge and Custom Games (which were greatly hindered in Halo 4) as these were the primary issues players had with the game. The rest, mostly the Campaign, is bound to improve with the hardware. I think we’re going to see more consistently good visuals as well as a return to the huge battles in Halo 3 (maybe the Scarab will return as well) and a much needed upgrade to the enemies. The story is headed in an interesting place, mostly because we only have vague hints as to where it is going. It’s like a new beginning, and it’s bound to be fresh and interesting.
> > > >
> > > > Halo 5 will be better than Halo 4 in every way, no doubt. Will it be as good as the original trilogy? Maybe not, but it will definitely be a good game. Halo 5 will mark the series’ last chance at regaining its audience, and it will be great to see what 343i musters in attempt to do just that.
> > > >
> > > > You ask why you should buy the next Halo. You should do it because it will be a legitimate Halo game. It will return to its roots at least in some aspects (even if Infinity remains at the center) and it will be a truly next generation Halo game. If that’s not enough for you, nothing will be.
> > >
> > > I’ve never seen so many blind (and wrong) assumptions in a post before.
> > >
> > > OT: You shouldn’t. There are too many good games now and in the future for people to bother with a series that keeps cutting features and deviating from the things that made it good.
> >
> > Ironic how you make blind and incorrect assumptions on 343 and halo 5 despite halo 4 being their first game. Plus if they is so many games that you no longer care why are you here?
>
> 343 is made up of people who have years of industry experience as it pertains to their disciplines. It might be their first attempt at Halo, but that’s not an excuse for paid professionals who have worked on other projects before.
>
> I make no assumptions because common sense makes it obvious that competitive gaming is not going to be the forefront of multiplayer now or ever. If you or anyone is madly in love with 343, then I certainly don’t expect that to be clear.

Yes they wanted to see what the community likes and dislikes instead of making a carbon copy which all the players who hate COD flame it for yet want a carbon copy. Working on other projects means they have little experience with the delicate halo community.

You are making assumptions that halo 5 wont be competitive even though you havnt played it and have a limited research sample of one game. I’m not madly in love with halo 4 I understand the faults of the game and complain about them as well on occasion but I dont make stupid assumptions based of one game and flame the producers for trying something that may keep the game fresh.

How do you know whether halo 5 will not be competitive. You dont only halo 4 hasnt been competitive and 343 keep updating halo 4 with some of the possible community suggestions so they may make halo 5 more competitive for all you know.

9

> Yes they wanted to see what the community likes and dislikes instead of making a carbon copy which all the players who hate COD flame it for yet want a carbon copy.

So what if people flame CoD? CoD is successful and rakes in the players because it sticks to its winning formula? CoD isn’t ashamed of what it is and doesn’t try to play like something its not. The people at 343 should have understood this and applied that line of thinking to Halo, but they didn’t.

> on other projects means they have little experience with the delicate halo community.

They don’t need to gain experience to know what the players want. The reason is because they had TEN YEARS of Halo gameplay and community behaviour to look at and say “okay, the players like this game mode and that game type, but they’re pretty hard on this game mechanic, so we should change it or remove it”. That’s why Reach should have been a huge learning experience for 343 in understanding the importance of a powerful feature set and the dangers of putting anti-Halo elements like loadouts into Halo.

> You are making assumptions that halo 5 wont be competitive even though you havnt played it and have a limited research sample of one game. I’m not madly in love with halo 4 I understand the faults of the game and complain about them as well on occasion but I dont make stupid assumptions based of one game and flame the producers for trying something that may keep the game fresh.

I didn’t need to play Halo 4 to know that it was going to completely give competitive players the shaft and the same will hold true for future games. The fact is that Halo has continually been getting worse for that sort of thing.

  • Multiple 1-50 playlists (Halo 3) to one main Arena playlist (Reach) to nothing (Halo 4).

  • Equal weapons starts (Halo 3) to gametype-set loadouts (Reach) to customizable loadouts (Halo 4).

There’s a history to derive these conclusions from.

Also, there are many ways to keep a game fresh without trying to outperform other shooters.

> How do you know whether halo 5 will not be competitive. You dont only halo 4 hasnt been competitive and 343 keep updating halo 4 with some of the possible community suggestions so they may make halo 5 more competitive for all you know.

343 improved Reach with the title update, but that had no bearing on how Halo 4 would turn out. There’s no reason to think that 343’s efforts to make Halo better should be indicative on their next game.

10

Because there’s a chance that 343i learned their lesson with Halo 4, and will apply what they learned to make Halo: Xbone what their debut should’ve been.

11

Halo 5 will inevitably be a much better game.
343 has only shown signs of improvement.
-Constant updates lean towards a more balanced game.
-DLC improves each time a new one is released.
-Global Championship shows 343’s taking competitive gaming more seriously.
-And above all, 343 has acknowledged their mistakes and has told us they’ll do better.

I have absolute faith in 343.
If they disappoint me again, then I’ll stop supporting them.
That’s all there is to it.

12

> > Yes they wanted to see what the community likes and dislikes instead of making a carbon copy which all the players who hate COD flame it for yet want a carbon copy.
>
> So what if people flame CoD? CoD is successful and rakes in the players because it sticks to its winning formula? CoD isn’t ashamed of what it is and doesn’t try to play like something its not. The people at 343 should have understood this and applied that line of thinking to Halo, but they didn’t.
>
>
>
> > on other projects means they have little experience with the delicate halo community.
>
> They don’t need to gain experience to know what the players want. The reason is because they had TEN YEARS of Halo gameplay and community behaviour to look at and say “okay, the players like this game mode and that game type, but they’re pretty hard on this game mechanic, so we should change it or remove it”. That’s why Reach should have been a huge learning experience for 343 in understanding the importance of a powerful feature set and the dangers of putting anti-Halo elements like loadouts into Halo.
> The waned try something new which the community hadnt tried and many liked it. They tried something and got feedback. Somethings they kept from reach others they didnt. Reach plays different and was still successful thus it wasnt a huge let down somthey continued plau they added classic in
>
>
> > You are making assumptions that halo 5 wont be competitive even though you havnt played it and have a limited research sample of one game. I’m not madly in love with halo 4 I understand the faults of the game and complain about them as well on occasion but I dont make stupid assumptions based of one game and flame the producers for trying something that may keep the game fresh.
>
> I didn’t need to play Halo 4 to know that it was going to completely give competitive players the shaft and the same will hold true for future games. The fact is that Halo has continually been getting worse for that sort of thing.
> How do you know that the next one wont be competitive, the current ones are competitive just not as much as the last and its part of the feedback thus they may alter the gameplay to be more competitive.
> - Multiple 1-50 playlists (Halo 3) to one main Arena playlist (Reach) to nothing (Halo 4).
>
> - Equal weapons starts (Halo 3) to gametype-set loadouts (Reach) to customizable loadouts (Halo 4).
>
> There’s a history to derive these conclusions from.
>
> Also, there are many ways to keep a game fresh without trying to outperform other shooters.
>
> Yes they tried something new again doesnt mean they wont bring back stuff.
>
>
>
> > How do you know whether halo 5 will not be competitive. You dont only halo 4 hasnt been competitive and 343 keep updating halo 4 with some of the possible community suggestions so they may make halo 5 more competitive for all you know.
>
> 343 improved Reach with the title update, but that had no bearing on how Halo 4 would turn out. There’s no reason to think that 343’s efforts to make Halo better should be indicative on their next game.

It did if you notice it plays better than reach pre patch they had some idea plus the new features had an extra effect which they didnt know would happen. There is plenty of reasons and the one that negates all your arguments for halo 5 definitely being yoink is that they listen to feedback meaning they will alter things heavily to what people like.

13

> the one that negates all your arguments for halo 5 definitely being yoink is that they listen to feedback meaning they will alter things heavily to what people like.

Tons of developers claim to and do integrate feedback in their decisions. It’s not an exclusive kindness delivered by 343 alone, so that argument is invalid.

Did 343 pay attention to the negative feedback regarding armor abilities and loadouts in Reach? Obviously not considering that they went crazy and made them a bigger part of multiplayer. Why? To make the game easier for bad players.

That’s how I know that competitive Halo doesn’t exist outside of the older games. Things are the way they are on purpose, not because of some horrible accident in game design.

14

> > the one that negates all your arguments for halo 5 definitely being yoink is that they listen to feedback meaning they will alter things heavily to what people like.
>
> Tons of developers claim to and do integrate feedback in their decisions. It’s not an exclusive kindness delivered by 343 alone, so that argument is invalid.
>
> Did 343 pay attention to the negative feedback regarding armor abilities and loadouts in Reach? Obviously not considering that they went crazy and made them a bigger part of multiplayer. Why? To make the game easier for bad players.
>
> That’s how I know that competitive Halo doesn’t exist outside of the older games. Things are the way they are on purpose, not because of some horrible accident in game design.

343 take in more feedback than any other company I know which is why the changed a load of things in halo 4

They make competitive playlists for those who like them which is why there may be a classic infinity divide in halo 5. Reach had MLG which was quite competitive. AAs can work thats why however not as they are if its to be competitive hence why the added team throwdown. Plus many people loved AAs who were good players.

Never said it was an accident which it wasnt it was mearly a testing ground for some of their ideas which many people like and they understood that majority didnt however.

343 support and interact and take feedback better than other game companies so why not trust them.

Plus they had limits with the 360 which they no longer had allowing them to do more which they may of cut from 4 that would of made it a better game.

Since you’ve given up on halo answer my earlier question of why are you here? And have you played halo 4 after TU?

15

> 343 take in more feedback than any other company I know which is why the changed a load of things in halo 4

They changed a load of things people hated 343’s seemingly arbitrary decisions (5sk BR, no red Xs and no skill-based ranks, in-game or otherwise).

It’s hard to give 343 credit for their changes when the changes were made to undo their own actions, which made players frustrated and caused them to stop playing altogether.

> They make competitive playlists for those who like them which is why there may be a classic infinity divide in halo 5. Reach had MLG which was quite competitive. AAs can work thats why however not as they are if its to be competitive hence why the added team throwdown. Plus many people loved AAs who were good players.

Playlists made to be competitive don’t work when the gameplay wasn’t designed for them. That’s why Reach’s classic playlist failed and why Team Throwdown is a failure as well. It’s even worse when those playlists are added as an afterthought because the target audience is NO LONGER PLAYING THE GAME.

> Never said it was an accident which it wasnt it was mearly a testing ground for some of their ideas which many people like and they understood that majority didnt however.

It doesn`t matter if they know that the majority dislike the changes. 343 is going to stick with them for the sake of grabbing good reviews and a large launch population.

The problem is rooted deeper in the sense that the developers ultimately dont care about longevity, only flash and hype. This is Microsoft were talking about.

343 support and interact and take feedback better than other game companies so why not trust them.

Accommodating feedback (which other developers do, like I said) isn`t nearly enough to warrant trust in a studio that shamelessly abused its ownership of the franchise to drive their warped vision of Halo gameplay.

> Plus they had limits with the 360 which they no longer had allowing them to do more which they may of cut from 4 that would of made it a better game.

You seem to have forgotten that Halo 3 and Reach ran on the same console, and those games didn’t have any trouble expanding on features and offering things like ranks and terminals in the game.

16

> > 343 take in more feedback than any other company I know which is why the changed a load of things in halo 4
>
> They changed a load of things people hated 343’s seemingly arbitrary decisions (5sk BR, no red Xs and no skill-based ranks, in-game or otherwise).
>
> It’s hard to give 343 credit for their changes when the changes were made to undo their own actions, which made players frustrated and caused them to stop playing altogether.
> Yes but it shows that they are listening and willing to improve which is my yoinking point.
>
>
> > They make competitive playlists for those who like them which is why there may be a classic infinity divide in halo 5. Reach had MLG which was quite competitive. AAs can work thats why however not as they are if its to be competitive hence why the added team throwdown. Plus many people loved AAs who were good players.
>
> Playlists made to be competitive don’t work when the gameplay wasn’t designed for them. That’s why Reach’s classic playlist failed and why Team Throwdown is a failure as well. It’s even worse when those playlists are added as an afterthought because the target audience is NO LONGER PLAYING THE GAME.
> Doesnt mean they wont be in launch for halo 5 which is my point again but it also shows that they are listening.
>
>
> > Never said it was an accident which it wasnt it was mearly a testing ground for some of their ideas which many people like and they understood that majority didnt however.
>
> It doesn`t matter if they know that the majority dislike the changes. 343 is going to stick with them for the sake of grabbing good reviews and a large launch population.

The problem is rooted deeper in the sense that the developers ultimately dont care about longevity, only flash and hype. This is Microsoft were talking about.
Or because they dont want to leave players out who prefer certain things again when they can easily have the game split in two which may happen in halo 5 which is point AGAIN!

343 support and interact and take feedback better than other game companies so why not trust them.

Accommodating feedback (which other developers do, like I said) isn`t nearly enough to warrant trust in a studio that shamelessly abused its ownership of the franchise to drive their warped vision of Halo gameplay.
> What one game thats off thats not altering it drastically its altering it slightly and doesnt disprove why halo 5 wont have these things people ask for, again.
>
>
> > Plus they had limits with the 360 which they no longer had allowing them to do more which they may of cut from 4 that would of made it a better game.
>
> You seem to have forgotten that Halo 3 and Reach ran on the same console, and those games didn’t have any trouble expanding on features and offering things like ranks and terminals in the game.

Yes they also ran on more experienced developers and worse graphics so hardware limits are taken into account so they had less to add, now they have less restraints and more money to pay for it.

17

@Champion this argument is pointless since you wont realise that non of these things show that 343 wont do it for halo 5 which is my point if you actually listened properly.

18

Halo 4 was unsuccessful because the 360 could not handle Spartan Ops and more people play Halo Reach then Halo 4 currently. Also the rank system was stupidly short, and their were no real innovations in forge and not big enough maps for forge. All these little things are what led up to halo 4’s drop in population.

19

> Yes they also ran on more experienced developers and worse graphics so hardware limits are taken into account so they had less to add, now they have less restraints and more money to pay for it.

The people at 343 ARE experienced. If you watch the Working at 343 Industries video, you can see that lots of the people have been in industry for many years.

Also, if the graphics were going to negatively affect other parts of the game, then why not just ease up on the graphics? That seems like a pretty simple solution. As for money, that was never an issue. If 343 chooses to dump tons of funds into things like Forward Unto Dawn and other marketing campaigns, that’s their choice, but they shouldn’t be surprised when the quality of the game drops.

20

> Halo 4 was unsuccessful because the 360 could not handle Spartan Ops and more people play Halo Reach then Halo 4 currently. Also the rank system was stupidly short, and their were no real innovations in forge and not big enough maps for forge. All these little things are what led up to halo 4’s drop in population.

Which they can learn from and improve for halo 5.