I don’t see the reason a lot of people say halo needs to get with the times and add sprint and a lot of other stupid additions into it. Does anyone else remember why halo was fun? To me it was the simplicity of it. That’s what the first 3 were, simple and fun. Bungie tried something different with reach and look what happened, a lot of people hate it(I do). Also people say halo will be boring or will get boring if it doesn’t change…uhhhh the first three were fantastic and I never got bored with any of them. Slight changes are good for halo I do know that, but all of these aa’s, horrible ranking systems, bad weapons and maps need to go. Now we are faced with halo 4, some kind of new aa’s, maybe perks, spartan points?( I just threw up) and god help me sprint. That is the main thing I hate is sprint. Halo was so unique without it and the running speed was fine. All hope is gone.
Don’t be so pessimistic. These features will add a new level of gameplay to Halo. Plus, if they can’t evolve, they can’t compete with other games, and then there will be no Halo at all.
You know why nothing was seriously changed until Reach? Because the franchise was still young enough to add tiny changes with each installment, to add onto the formula, but leave the game largely unchanged. Not so, anymore. You can’t put out the same game, year after year (Call of Duty being the [God only knows how] exception to the rule) and not flop. Sometimes, you need to change “for the sake of change”, or you miss the boat and it’s too late to change at all.
It’s not about “competing with other FPSs”. It’s about evolving Halo as a series. The reason these changes are being made isn’t to “Be a CoD-killer” or anything like that, I can assure you. If they stuck to the same old formula then what’s the point of a new trilogy? Why release more Halo games if they’re all just going to be graphical updates of the last? Halo is an absolute god-tier game series but that doesn’t mean it can stick to the same old formula and continue to be fun. It would get boring. Fast.
Using Reach as a yardstick for how drastic change works is, to me, foolish. It’s an entirely different developer that, believe it or not, played Reach as well, it didn’t pass them by. Just because something similar was in Reach it does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that it’s doomed to failure in any conceivable implementation, and just because some changes didn’t turn out great, it doesn’t mean all change is bad.
Frankly it would be insulting to Halo to just never change it up. It would become a parody of itself. The population would plummet. This assumption that the only thing Halo can do to “win back it’s fanbase” is pathetic. The ironic thing is, people say Halo 4 is “becoming CoD” but the only way it would “become CoD” is to do exactly what said people want. To release the same game each time. It would become bland and uninteresting.
Yes, you have to retain the “Halo feel” but that doesn’t mean you can only limit the game to the confines of the past.
> You know why nothing was seriously changed until Reach? Because the franchise was still young enough to add tiny changes with each installment, to add onto the formula, but leave the game largely unchanged. Not so, anymore. You can’t put out the same game, year after year (Call of Duty being the [God only knows how] exception to the rule) and not flop. Sometimes, you need to change “for the sake of change”, or you miss the boat and it’s too late to change at all.
Miss what boat? If halo kept doing slight changes with the new trilogy i bet it would get even more sales and be incredible.