Will Halo ever see its glory days return?

Community General Discussion
1

I’m quite sure that many can agree with me that what 343 is doing to the franchise right now is a pale imitation of what you started loving halo for in the first place. Will this 343 era of the halo franchise ever see the glory days of the Bungie era return? This is something that I’m pretty sure every halo fan since the Bungie games has thought about at least once. The answer to my question lies heavily on what Halo 6 delivers, or at least the next game after the Reclaimer Saga finally ends. Now, what exactly do I mean by my question? I mean two things, actually.

Firstly, will the Halo franchise ever be as good as it used to be under Bungie? As in, will the games start to get critically better? Will the fans ever stop having to criticise the plot and campaign for every 343-made halo game? Will 343 ever stop giving the fans reasons to hate on them and be disappointed? (I’m looking at you, broken MCC, and pathetic Halo 5 release content. And that’s just two common examples of the many examples we can all relate to whenever talking about infuriating mistakes 343 has made)

Secondly, (and whether this is a good or bad thing is highly debatable, as different fans have different opinions on what they like and dislike) will the Halo games ever see a return to how the classic Halo games were like? For example, the absence of Sprint, the old art style, AND ACTUALLY GOOD AND MEMORABLE MISSIONS?! Or will the future games always follow the trend Halo 4 and 5 have set, even after the Reclaimer Saga ends.

As a long-time halo fan, to be frank it’ll break my heart if the franchise I grew up with stays forever radically changed and different under the direction of 343, and ultimately culminates as just a glorified CoD rip-off. Yes, maybe I’m being a bit dramatic, but is that such a hard thing to believe if all future Halo games are exactly like Halo 5 and keep constantly evolving the way 343 wants them to? See the change from Halo 3 to 4. Then, 4 to 5. Each game is barely recognisable as being related to the one before!

Please, all I want is for a new Saga to begin where it’s just Chief and Cortana killing Covies and Flood again, like the good old days. Call me old-fashioned, and call this statement wishful thinking. I know that 343 has stated that Halo is their intellectual property now, and that they want to do the games their own way, but at least ONE HALO GAME that is a slight throwback to the old games would be epic for me. Does anyone else feel the same way as me, and does anyone know whether 343 has ever mentioned in the slightest that they’ll even consider re-working what they’re doing for the halo games right now?

2

It sounds like you’re forgetting that alot of the trends we see in today’s Halo started with Halo Reach, which was a Bungie game. You talk about how Halo 4 was “barely recognizable” compared to Halo 3. How recognizable was Reach compared to 3 in your eyes? 343i has made many changes to the franchise but your post makes it sound like Bungie could do no wrong with Halo, when (if you look around for opinions on Reach) was certainly not the case.

Also, not every 343i Halo gets criticized on its campaign/story. Halo 4 was well-received by critics and players alike. I haven’t played it but I’ve heard that Halo Wars 2 had an interesting, albeit short story. As for comments made by 343i on the future of Halo, they’ve confirmed that the next Halo will focus on Master Chief like before Halo 5, and that splitscreen will make a return.

3

> 2535405380102010;1:
> I’m quite sure that many can agree with me that what 343 is doing to the franchise right now is a pale imitation of what you started loving halo for in the first place. Will this 343 era of the halo franchise ever see the glory days of the Bungie era return? This is something that I’m pretty sure every halo fan since the Bungie games has thought about at least once. The answer to my question lies heavily on what Halo 6 delivers, or at least the next game after the Reclaimer Saga finally ends. Now, what exactly do I mean by my question? I mean two things, actually.
>
> Firstly, will the Halo franchise ever be as good as it used to be under Bungie? As in, will the games start to get critically better? Will the fans ever stop having to criticise the plot and campaign for every 343-made halo game? Will 343 ever stop giving the fans reasons to hate on them and be disappointed? (I’m looking at you, broken MCC, and pathetic Halo 5 release content. And that’s just two common examples of the many examples we can all relate to whenever talking about infuriating mistakes 343 has made)
>
> Secondly, (and whether this is a good or bad thing is highly debatable, as different fans have different opinions on what they like and dislike) will the Halo games ever see a return to how the classic Halo games were like? For example, the absence of Sprint, the old art style, AND ACTUALLY GOOD AND MEMORABLE MISSIONS?! Or will the future games always follow the trend Halo 4 and 5 have set, even after the Reclaimer Saga ends.
>
> As a long-time halo fan, to be frank it’ll break my heart if the franchise I grew up with stays forever radically changed and different under the direction of 343, and ultimately culminates as just a glorified CoD rip-off. Yes, maybe I’m being a bit dramatic, but is that such a hard thing to believe if all future Halo games are exactly like Halo 5 and keep constantly evolving the way 343 wants them to? See the change from Halo 3 to 4. Then, 4 to 5. Each game is barely recognisable as being related to the one before!
>
> Please, all I want is for a new Saga to begin where it’s just Chief and Cortana killing Covies and Flood again, like the good old days. Call me old-fashioned, and call this statement wishful thinking. I know that 343 has stated that Halo is their intellectual property now, and that they want to do the games their own way, but at least ONE HALO GAME that is a slight throwback to the old games would be epic for me. Does anyone else feel the same way as me, and does anyone know whether 343 has ever mentioned in the slightest that they’ll even consider re-working what they’re doing for the halo games right now?

I was worried I felt this way because I am getting old (30 old around here?). MCC was great in theory but terribly executed. They screwed up so bad and just walked away washing their hands. H4 was ok. I didn’t hate it, but it didn’t give me that WOW feeling. Multiplayer didn’t keep me around that long either. Art style changes started to make me cringe. Such as… What are the Marines wearing? Look how bad *** they used to be to the pajamas they wear now?

The new Spartans make me want to vomit. Spartans are supposed to be stone cold honorable warriors that made normal rank and file excited just to see. Now… They are just frat boy “bros”. Every One is a Spartan and are just as likely to be seen doing a keg stand than fighting. That scene in Spartan ops where the fire team was about to hit on Palmer REALLY struck a nerve. Older Spartans would never do that. They automatically stiffen their back when they hear an officer rate.

Halo 5… Just took everything wrong and did it worse. Destroying lore, killing the honorable Spartan persona, art style looks like anime cartoon rather that the gritty warriors from 1,2,3. Story line was HORRIBLE. I didn’t once feel “into” the story.

My feel is 343 took a cash cow and instead of expanding on it… They are going to milk it to death and toss aside. Remember how much Halo was talked about 5-10 years ago? There were lines to get into lines for midnight release. Now it is “well… We will see how it is after release and maybe pick it up on sale.”

4

> 2533274817408735;2:
> It sounds like you’re forgetting that alot of the trends we see in today’s Halo started with Halo Reach, which was a Bungie game. You talk about how Halo 4 was “barely recognizable” compared to Halo 3. How recognizable was Reach compared to 3 in your eyes? 343i has made many changes to the franchise but your post makes it sound like Bungie could do no wrong with Halo, when (if you look around for opinions on Reach) was certainly not the case.
>
> Also, not every 343i Halo gets criticized on its campaign/story. Halo 4 was well-received by critics and players alike. I haven’t played it but I’ve heard that Halo Wars 2 had an interesting, albeit short story. As for comments made by 343i on the future of Halo, they’ve confirmed that the next Halo will focus on Master Chief like before Halo 5, and that splitscreen will make a return.

I truly am sorry, I should have been more specific in my post, and instead of addressing Halo as a whole, instead only talked about how the main Master Chief games are going. You make good points about Reach and Halo Wars 2!

You’re absolutely right, Halo Wars 2 had an amazing story, and even better cutscenes that told it! The pre-launch trailers made me crap my pants, and the in-game cinematics didn’t disappoint. I would say that I probably just played through the entire Campaign just for them Blur cutscenes xD. But this game wasn’t a Master Chief game, so that’s why I didn’t consider it in my initial post, but I should really give 343 more credit and have been more specific, they did make this game’s plot a very good halo plot.

And about Reach, I guess it’s true that it was the first halo game to introduce the Armour Abilites, loudouts, and Sprint, to a certain degree. To me, those were cool mechanics that didn’t really mess up the feel of halo just yet, because to me Reach was pretty much a standalone game in the franchise, just a completely different and unique concept of a halo game that was a break from Master Chief’s adventures. You gotta admit, the new mechanics like Armour Abilites did work pretty well as concepts in Reach, because we were basically playing as a new generation of Spartan supersoldiers all geared up with prototype tech. We were fighting to defend the mighty UNSC stronghold, Reach, what a better way to flaunt the UNSC’s military supremacy by equipping us with shiny new gear and weaponry?

But then they just had to bring out most of all the aspects from Reach to Halo 4! That didn’t make sense to me at all. So yeah, 4 years after Halo 3 and somehow suddenly Chief wakes up remembering that Armour Abilites are a thing, but forgets how to dual-wield? Yes, I’ll give you that, Halo 4 wasn’t too bad, but it wasn’t too good, either. The one thing I liked about it was its nice soundtrack. Some will say that the game is actually pretty decent, but then again you’ll still hear quite a bunch say that they hated the Campaign. I recall a few who said it was a little bit linear, but I guess the general thing that most commented about was that they didn’t like fighting Prometheans. But that’s all about opinion, anyway.

So to be clear what I mean is that I don’t agree with what 343 is doing to the Master Chief games right now. Yes, change is good, and some people are probably glad that Halo is evolving, but I feel strongly that the change is coming way too fast! First, we were juggling Armour abilities, a newly introduced Sprint, loadouts, and the weird score-streak ordanance drops thingys. Then along came Halo 5, which kinda threw most of that out the window, and introduced Spartan abilities, a buffed Sprint, and aiming down the sights which has never been in halo like since the very start. I just feel that it would be a nice break from all of this if they could just switch back slightly to the old halo formula of the old games. And that’s just describing the general gameplay, I haven’t gone on to talk about the classic aspects of the core characters, the story and the art style that they could revive!

I’m not afraid to admit that nostalgia may be clouding a lot of my judgement. Which is why I would like to see more replies to see what others think, anyway, to make sure I’m not alone in thinking all this. Well, thanks for the comprehensive reply! btw if 343 does deliver on their promises about Halo 6 that you’ve mentioned, then at least that shows that they’re trying not to make a repeat of their mistakes with Halo 5, which is a good sign. I’m quite sure they’ll get back lots of fans who’s left halo thus far just because of the fact they’re supporting split-screen again :stuck_out_tongue:

5

> 2533274801155613;3:
> > 2535405380102010;1:
> > I’m quite sure that many can agree with me that what 343 is doing to the franchise right now is a pale imitation of what you started loving halo for in the first place. Will this 343 era of the halo franchise ever see the glory days of the Bungie era return? This is something that I’m pretty sure every halo fan since the Bungie games has thought about at least once. The answer to my question lies heavily on what Halo 6 delivers, or at least the next game after the Reclaimer Saga finally ends. Now, what exactly do I mean by my question? I mean two things, actually.
> >
> > Firstly, will the Halo franchise ever be as good as it used to be under Bungie? As in, will the games start to get critically better? Will the fans ever stop having to criticise the plot and campaign for every 343-made halo game? Will 343 ever stop giving the fans reasons to hate on them and be disappointed? (I’m looking at you, broken MCC, and pathetic Halo 5 release content. And that’s just two common examples of the many examples we can all relate to whenever talking about infuriating mistakes 343 has made)
> >
> > Secondly, (and whether this is a good or bad thing is highly debatable, as different fans have different opinions on what they like and dislike) will the Halo games ever see a return to how the classic Halo games were like? For example, the absence of Sprint, the old art style, AND ACTUALLY GOOD AND MEMORABLE MISSIONS?! Or will the future games always follow the trend Halo 4 and 5 have set, even after the Reclaimer Saga ends.
> >
> > As a long-time halo fan, to be frank it’ll break my heart if the franchise I grew up with stays forever radically changed and different under the direction of 343, and ultimately culminates as just a glorified CoD rip-off. Yes, maybe I’m being a bit dramatic, but is that such a hard thing to believe if all future Halo games are exactly like Halo 5 and keep constantly evolving the way 343 wants them to? See the change from Halo 3 to 4. Then, 4 to 5. Each game is barely recognisable as being related to the one before!
> >
> > Please, all I want is for a new Saga to begin where it’s just Chief and Cortana killing Covies and Flood again, like the good old days. Call me old-fashioned, and call this statement wishful thinking. I know that 343 has stated that Halo is their intellectual property now, and that they want to do the games their own way, but at least ONE HALO GAME that is a slight throwback to the old games would be epic for me. Does anyone else feel the same way as me, and does anyone know whether 343 has ever mentioned in the slightest that they’ll even consider re-working what they’re doing for the halo games right now?
>
> I was worried I felt this way because I am getting old (30 old around here?). MCC was great in theory but terribly executed. They screwed up so bad and just walked away washing their hands. H4 was ok. I didn’t hate it, but it didn’t give me that WOW feeling. Multiplayer didn’t keep me around that long either. Art style changes started to make me cringe. Such as… What are the Marines wearing? Look how bad *** they used to be to the pajamas they wear now?
>
> The new Spartans make me want to vomit. Spartans are supposed to be stone cold honorable warriors that made normal rank and file excited just to see. Now… They are just frat boy “bros”. Every One is a Spartan and are just as likely to be seen doing a keg stand than fighting. That scene in Spartan ops where the fire team was about to hit on Palmer REALLY struck a nerve. Older Spartans would never do that. They automatically stiffen their back when they hear an officer rate.
>
> Halo 5… Just took everything wrong and did it worse. Destroying lore, killing the honorable Spartan persona, art style looks like anime cartoon rather that the gritty warriors from 1,2,3. Story line was HORRIBLE. I didn’t once feel “into” the story.
>
> My feel is 343 took a cash cow and instead of expanding on it… They are going to milk it to death and toss aside. Remember how much Halo was talked about 5-10 years ago? There were lines to get into lines for midnight release. Now it is “well… We will see how it is after release and maybe pick it up on sale.”

To be very, very frank with myself… I would say that 90% of what you’ve said has crossed my mind before. But I’ll still try to find more credit for the work 343 has done, and maybe take a step back and try to appreciate the stuff they’ve done RIGHT. Which is really hard right now.

6

> 2533274817408735;2:
> It sounds like you’re forgetting that alot of the trends we see in today’s Halo started with Halo Reach, which was a Bungie game. […] 343i has made many changes to the franchise but your post makes it sound like Bungie could do no wrong with Halo, when (if you look around for opinions on Reach) was certainly not the case.

No, Bungie is certainly not perfect, not by a longshot. And current Bungie isn’t even the same company as it was ten years ago.
That being said, people seem to forget that Reach was a spinoff. Not only did it not have a number in the title, it didn’t even have “Halo” in the title. Nowhere in the game itself is the franchise name mentioned. The main menu and the intro cutscene all just spell out “Reach”, nothing else. I strongly assume it was just put on the cover by Microsoft for marketability.
So, being a spinoff, it makes sense (or at least it’s excusable) that it has different mechanics than the main series. It focuses on a completely different generation of Spartans, that are weaker than S-II’s, so they can’t shoot while sprinting, and the weapon recoil affects them more, thus explaining bloom. It was intentionally meant to play different from the main series and in the context of the greater universe, the mechanics make (somewhat) sense. Shoehorning these mechanics (and then some, like ADS) onto the Chief, however, does not.
It’s also brash at best, deceptive at worst, to number the games that break with the original formula but instead follow Reach. Gameplay-wise, Halo 4 and H5G are not continuations of Halo 3, so they should not claim to be.

> 2533274817408735;2:
> You talk about how Halo 4 was “barely recognizable” compared to Halo 3. How recognizable was Reach compared to 3 in your eyes?

Well, certainly a lot more than everything that came after it. In terms of gameplay, it was a departure from its parent series, but at least it felt as if it played in the same universe: The UNSC symbol was the same, jackals still had the same anatomy, grunts had the correct number of toes, and so forth. Sure, all of this was explained later down the line, but that was merely a rationalization, an afterthought, to retroactively justify change for the sake of change.

> 2533274817408735;2:
> I haven’t played it but I’ve heard that Halo Wars 2 had an interesting, albeit short story.

Honest question: Who wrote the Halo Wars 2 story? Was it somebody from 343 or from Creative Assembly?

7

> 2533274801176260;6:
> > 2533274817408735;2:
> >
>
>
>
> > 2533274817408735;2:
> > I haven’t played it but I’ve heard that Halo Wars 2 had an interesting, albeit short story.
>
> Honest question: Who wrote the Halo Wars 2 story? Was it somebody from 343 or from Creative Assembly?

Kevin Grace wrote–or at least was a main writer for–HW2. He works for 343i.

> 2533274801176260;6:
> > 2533274817408735;2:
> > You talk about how Halo 4 was “barely recognizable” compared to Halo 3. How recognizable was Reach compared to 3 in your eyes?
>
> Well, certainly a lot more than everything that came after it. In terms of gameplay, it was a departure from its parent series, but at least it felt as if it played in the same universe: The UNSC symbol was the same, jackals still had the same anatomy, grunts had the correct number of toes, and so forth. Sure, all of this was explained later down the line, but that was merely a rationalization, an afterthought, to retroactively justify change for the sake of change.

You make it sound like Bungie never changed things just to change them and then justify it later. How Cortana looked, how Brutes looked, the Elite armor diversity; these are some examples of things that differed noticeably between games, in part due to advances in console technology, but then given reasoning in the lore after the fact. And you can’t tell me that a you can’t recognize a Halo 4 grunt compared to a Halo 3 grunt. Sure there may be anatomical differences, but the spirit of the unit is very much the same. Bungie even changed the symbol for ONI in Halo 3 ODST, which canonically happens before Halo 3, just for the sake of change. This doesn’t make Halo less recognizable though. Now I may not be 100% on board with all of 343i’s aesthetic changes, but when I played Halo 4 for the first time, I immediately recognized it as a Halo game.

8

readcting this because I totally mis-read a sentance

9

I can respect these opinions as long as we’re all able to acknowledge that they’re just that: opinions. Having played every Halo from the beginning, launch date to launch date, I feel fairly invested in the franchise, and I feel fairly well-versed in the comings and goings of each game and what the different developers have brought to the table. And what I see when I read “bring back the good old days” threads like this is somebody who was completely blind to the shortcomings of those older games and their developer. In my experience each and every Halo has been amazing and profoundly flawed at the same time and there is absolutely no correlation between the number and nature of those flaws on the one hand and who authored the game on the other. I respect your right to see it differently - the world certainly would be a boring place if we all agreed on everything every time - but I can’t see any objective criteria for favoring one title over another or one group of titles over another. Each of them brings the good with the bad, and sometimes it seems as if people only see the good in the early games because “happy childhood memories,” “nostalgia,” “simpler times,” and they only see the bad in the new because they had the effrontery to change.

10

343 admitted that they look at other ideas from different games like shoulder/spartan charge from Destiny for example and will implement them into Halo if it’ll work. They also admitted that one reason sprint was introduced was because it’s what modern FPS players expect in games. So it just shows that 343 looks at current trends in gaming instead of what’s best for Halo. Frank O’ Connor also said that H6 will be based off of H5’s mechanics.

So do I think 343 will make a classic main Halo game in the future? No, I don’t. The only way we’ll get a classic Halo game imo is if 343 makes a spinoff game like Bungie did with Reach or we get a new studio that makes Halo.

11

> 2727626560040591;10:
> 343 admitted that they look at other ideas from different games like shoulder/spartan charge from Destiny for example and will implement them into Halo if it’ll work. They also admitted that one reason sprint was introduced was because it’s what modern FPS players expect in games. So it just shows that 343 looks at current trends in gaming instead of what’s best for Halo. Frank O’ Connor also said that H6 will be based off of H5’s mechanics.
>
> So do I think 343 will make a classic main Halo game in the future? No, I don’t. The only way we’ll get a classic Halo game imo is if 343 makes a spinoff game like Bungie did with Reach or we get a new studio that makes Halo.

I guess the shoulder charge and what not bother me as much. They are spartans. They should be able to do lots of cool stuff… Just don’t go TO far with gimmicks and leave the action to fire fights.

12

Simply put, yes and no. It depends on Halo 6.

Look at the history of Halo.
>Halo 1 was revolutionary and was a launch title for a new platform, the Xbox.
>Call of Duty and Battlefield were in their early days and wouldn’t see their hayday untill the mid-2000’s.
>Titanfall, Killzone, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Destiny, Arma, and Star Wars Battlefront were not around at the time, leaving a lack of competition.
>Halo was unique in that three games in a row were literally on fire in the gaming community, with little to no flaws in BOTH multiplayer and single player.

You see where I’m going at here? Halo had a reason to be at the top for delivering home-runs with practically every title for about 10 years, but now, the franchise is more or less riding off of the namesake, as opposed to being standalone successes and genuinely good games in their own right. Back in the old days, ODST was considered the worst but still offered more in terms of creativity (firefight, non-spartans) than H4 and H5, which appear to be drawing inspirations from Titanfall and CoD (weapon variants, boosting, skins, dumb cosmetics, etc).
Halo Wars 2 is promising, though that is not to say FPS Halo is boring, but with a universe this rich and bountiful, RTS and cover based 3rd person games could be the future for Halo?

13

> 2533274817408735;7:
> You make it sound like Bungie never changed things just to change them and then justify it later. How Cortana looked, how Brutes looked, the Elite armor diversity; these are some examples of things that differed noticeably between games, in part due to advances in console technology, but then given reasoning in the lore after the fact. And you can’t tell me that a you can’t recognize a Halo 4 grunt compared to a Halo 3 grunt. Sure there may be anatomical differences, but the spirit of the unit is very much the same. Bungie even changed the symbol for ONI in Halo 3 ODST, which canonically happens before Halo 3, just for the sake of change. This doesn’t make Halo less recognizable though. Now I may not be 100% on board with all of 343i’s aesthetic changes, but when I played Halo 4 for the first time, I immediately recognized it as a Halo game.

That wasn’t the point I was trying to make. Yes, Bungie changed things between games, but they changed them gradually. A symbol here, some armor there. 343, on the other hand, went in there with a sledgehammer: Not a single enemy in Halo 4 looks like any of their previous iterations. All of them have completely different anatomy explained with “different subspecies that evolved on a different continent”. Tell me how many humans evolving in Australia or the southern Americas have developed an anatomy with a different number of toes compared to Europeans?
It’s not even that I dislike all of the changes, but their sheer amount combined with the pointlessness of most of them shows that the goal from the very start was to be as different as possible: All of the enemies were changed, half of the weapons don’t look the same (the design of the BR, the plasma rifle being replaced with the repeater, etc.), most of the UNSC vehicles looking completely different (Pelican, Warthog, etc.) with most of the covenant designes being modified one game later. It doesn’t help that even the new stuff follows completely different design principles, like the often-quoted forerunner architecture. This makes for a very rough transition between pre-343-games and Halo 4, since almost all recognisability is lost.
Would I have been able to identify Halo 4 as part of the franchise? That really depends on which part of the game we’re talking about. Had you shown me the Mantis section on Infinity out of context, no, I would not have assumed this is a Halo game, at all. Because the entire architecture looks nothing like any of the prior UNSC ships or stations we’ve been on, the design of the Mantis is completely foreign to all the heavy armor that was previously used (Cyclops, the Mark-I from Legends) and you’re mostly fighting Prometheans, which again look nothing like how Forerunners have been previously depicted. Only at the very end, when reaching the Phantom defense would I have realized that “Holy -Yoink-, this is actually supposed to be Halo!”
Same goes for multiplayer. With all the radically redesigned armor and weapons and especially the mechanics (sprint, flinch, ordnance, etc.), had you shown me a match on, say, Haven or Adrift out of context, not in a million years would I have made the connection to Halo. I’d rather have thought this to be a new Killzone or Crysis, or more likely a completely new IP altogether. Only after somebody would have called in one of the select few unaltered weapons, like the needler, the penny would have dropped.

14

> 2533274906195499;12:
> Simply put, yes and no. It depends on Halo 6.
>
> Look at the history of Halo.
> >Halo 1 was revolutionary and was a launch title for a new platform, the Xbox.
> >Call of Duty and Battlefield were in their early days and wouldn’t see their hayday untill the mid-2000’s.
> >Titanfall, Killzone, Gears of War, Mass Effect, Destiny, Arma, and Star Wars Battlefront were not around at the time, leaving a lack of competition.
> >Halo was unique in that three games in a row were literally on fire in the gaming community, with little to no flaws in BOTH multiplayer and single player.
>
> You see where I’m going at here? Halo had a reason to be at the top for delivering home-runs with practically every title for about 10 years, but now, the franchise is more or less riding off of the namesake, as opposed to being standalone successes and genuinely good games in their own right. Back in the old days, ODST was considered the worst but still offered more in terms of creativity (firefight, non-spartans) than H4 and H5, which appear to be drawing inspirations from Titanfall and CoD (weapon variants, boosting, skins, dumb cosmetics, etc).
> Halo Wars 2 is promising, though that is not to say FPS Halo is boring, but with a universe this rich and bountiful, RTS and cover based 3rd person games could be the future for Halo?

So you’re suggesting that classic Halo could shine because of little competition from the modern staples of multiplayer FPS that we’re seeing in excess nowadays? That is an interesting concept; could Halo be more successful right now if it was still following its classic style that Bungie first conceived, or would it be outshined by the other shooters nowadays that have more of the mechanics that Halo 4 and 5 have been adopting? Without the changes to Halo that have been happening to the newer 343 made games, would Halo be not relevant and lack success or would its classic features make it more popular and unique?

15

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post inappropriate content.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

Not as long as sprint exists. I stand firm that sprint single handedly ruined Halo. It’s a cancer with too many side effects.

16

> 2755103879196250;15:
> .

I can’t decide on sprint. I mean, Spartans should be able to sprint. Not be able to sprint forces players to fight and not just run away.

17

> 2755103879196250;15:
>

Pretty much agree.

And to the OP you are definitely not alone in hoping for another Halo game with a more classic feel to it. I like 343’s Halo games but there is part of me that wants a game without sprint and all the enhanced mobility and a more classic art style etc.

And maybe it is nostalgia but I just don’t see how a game like that would flop, if anything it would be refreshing imo.

18

> 2533274799153651;17:
> > 2755103879196250;15:
> >
>
> Pretty much agree.
>
> And to the OP you are definitely not alone in hoping for another Halo game with a more classic feel to it. I like 343’s Halo games but there is part of me that wants a game without sprint and all the enhanced mobility and a more classic art style etc.
>
> And maybe it is nostalgia but I just don’t see how a game like that would flop, if anything it would be refreshing imo.

343 had a tough task. Old dogs like me keep yelling bring back classic #getoffmylawn but there is a new generation who prefer CoD and Battlefield where even the weakest of players can get a kill.

Then, they pick up Halo and start shooting someone in the back thinking they got an for sure kill just to watch their opponent jump, boost back and assassinate (followed by aggressively tea bagging). They then rage quit and go back to CoD.

How does 343 keep those players around without just saying “git gud” (god I hate that saying). Me personally is the story that sucked me in. Epic and always wanting more then I stick around for the MP.

Where is the balance to appease the vets yet keep new generations involved (and continuing revenue). I have no idea. Me personally am ok with trying new things especially in MP as long as they return to the art style and remain a more skilled play (no CoD, titan fall, BF4, etc. luck kills).

19

> 2535405380102010;1:
> and keep constantly evolving the way 343 wants them to?

And therein lies the problem. 343 refuses to listen to its community for any and all things gameplay-related because they are too stubborn to admit they’re wrong. As long as they are making a sufficient amount of money by riding the coattails of the Halo name, they will continue to make lackluster games that drive the franchise into the ground.

Speak with your wallets and don’t buy 343 products. If you do, buy them used so 343/Microsoft doesn’t see the sales numbers.

20

> 2533274801155613;18:
> > 2533274799153651;17:
> > > 2755103879196250;15:
> > >
> >
> > Pretty much agree.
> >
> > And to the OP you are definitely not alone in hoping for another Halo game with a more classic feel to it. I like 343’s Halo games but there is part of me that wants a game without sprint and all the enhanced mobility and a more classic art style etc.
> >
> > And maybe it is nostalgia but I just don’t see how a game like that would flop, if anything it would be refreshing imo.
>
> 343 had a tough task. Old dogs like me keep yelling bring back classic #getoffmylawn but there is a new generation who prefer CoD and Battlefield where even the weakest of players can get a kill.
>
> Then, they pick up Halo and start shooting someone in the back thinking they got an for sure kill just to watch their opponent jump, boost back and assassinate (followed by aggressively tea bagging). They then rage quit and go back to CoD.
>
> How does 343 keep those players around without just saying “git gud” (god I hate that saying). Me personally is the story that sucked me in. Epic and always wanting more then I stick around for the MP.
>
> Where is the balance to appease the vets yet keep new generations involved (and continuing revenue). I have no idea. Me personally am ok with trying new things especially in MP as long as they return to the art style and remain a more skilled play (no CoD, titan fall, BF4, etc. luck kills).

Yea I hear you, you can’t please everyone. I’m pretty much in the same boat as you. CE is my favourite, but I like all the games.

But i think 343 definitely got a lot right with Halo 5’s multiplayer and with Halo 6 being a long way away still, I’m sure a lot of the criticism Halo 5 received is being addressed in halo 6.

But either way I’m looking forward to seeing how the gameplay has changed for Halo 6. I just hope it releases as a more complete game this time around with all the classic gametypes, forge, playable elites and of course split screen which has been confirmed.