Halo 3.5 (Halo 4)
Alot of people have beens saying lately that they don’t want Halo 4 to be based of Halo 3 and those people who do should learn to adapt and accept change. They also Mock the idea of improvement and Continuation by adressing it as Halo 3.5.
Whoever thinks that is an Idiot.
The Reason We want Halo 4 to build of Halo 3, is because Halo 3 was an Successful game reguardless of skill level. Halo 3 was my FIRST online shooter EVER prior to that the only muliplayer experience I got was against my family, I was MINDBLOWN on how good and fluid players could be. and For my first few games I was out my Depth. But as I improved as a Player so Did the competition around me and I was slowly eased into the halo community as a very low skill player. So we need to get rid of this myth that 1-50(1-100) is Only for competitive players. Its for EVERYONE, it far better that the credit system which needs to be scraped, which Just throws random people into lobbies raguardless of their skill. its Frustating for both set of Players. Competitive and Casual.
Halo 3 like I said was a good game, whats wrong with wanting some of the feature it had to return for halo 4. No Halo 3 Wasn’t perfect but it is FAR better than reach and the problems It did have can be improved/Fix along with some new additions 343i Adds as long it doesn’t change the core or focus of the game. It’s not that I want a carbon Copy of Halo 3 I just want Halo to stay true to its roots
I think the entire trilogy was a overall major success and that yes, Halo 4 should be based off of this. BUT unfortunately it will never happen. The community is blind as a whole and grabbing at eachothers throats over petty gameplay mechanics that never should have been there in the first place.
If Halo for can take from the succesful elements of both Halo 3 and, dare I say it, Reach, then they can create a very succesful formula, thus bringing in more fans and players. If they build upon the competitive gameplay from Halo 3 and the casual gameplay from Reach, it could, in theory, create a better formula. From what it seems, that is what 343i is doing.
> Halo 3.5 (Halo 4)
> Alot of people have beens saying lately that they don’t want Halo 4 to be based of Halo 3 and those people who do should learn to adapt and accept change. They also Mock the idea of improvement and Continuation by adressing it as Halo 3.5.
>
> Whoever thinks that is an Idiot.
>
> The Reason We want Halo 4 to build of Halo 3, is because Halo 3 was an Successful game reguardless of skill level. Halo 3 was my FIRST online shooter EVER prior to that the only muliplayer experience I got was against my family, I was MINDBLOWN on how good and fluid players good be. and For my first few games I was out my Depth. But as I improved as a Player so Did the competition around me and I was slowly eased into the halo community as a very low skill player. So we need to get rid of this myth that 1-50(1-100) is Only for competitive players. Its for EVERYONE, it far better that the credit system which needs to be scraped, which Just throws random people into lobbies raguard of their skill. its Frustating for both set of Players. Competitive and Casual.
>
> Halo 3 like I said was a good game, whats wrong with wanting some of the feature it had to return for halo 4. No Halo 3 Wasn’t perfect but it is FAR better than reach and the problems I did have can be improved/Fix along with some new additions 343i Adds as long it doesn’t change the core or focus of the game.
Same story, Halo 3 was the first game I played online ever (I played Halo 1 back in 2001 offline). In 2007 I would classify myself as a very bad player but today, I am one the best Team Slayer folks playing right now. I agree that the ranking system 1-50 should return, and within the ranked playlists there should be more classic gametypes than vanilla Halo 4. Mainly because I want ranked to be as competetive as it can be made.
> Halo 3.5 (Halo 4)
> Alot of people have beens saying lately that they don’t want Halo 4 to be based of Halo 3 and those people who do should learn to adapt and accept change. They also Mock the idea of improvement and Continuation by adressing it as Halo 3.5.
>
> Whoever thinks that is an Idiot.
>
> The Reason We want Halo 4 to build of Halo 3, is because Halo 3 was an Successful game reguardless of skill level. Halo 3 was my FIRST online shooter EVER prior to that the only muliplayer experience I got was against my family, I was MINDBLOWN on how good and fluid players good be. and For my first few games I was out my Depth. But as I improved as a Player so Did the competition around me and I was slowly eased into the halo community as a very low skill player. So we need to get rid of this myth that 1-50(1-100) is Only for competitive players. Its for EVERYONE, it far better that the credit system which needs to be scraped, which Just throws random people into lobbies raguard of their skill. its Frustating for both set of Players. Competitive and Casual.
>
> Halo 3 like I said was a good game, whats wrong with wanting some of the feature it had to return for halo 4. No Halo 3 Wasn’t perfect but it is FAR better than reach and the problems I did have can be improved/Fix along with some new additions 343i Adds as long it doesn’t change the core or focus of the game.
Your first word in your post does not exist. “Alot” is actually “a_lot” sorry I had to be a grammar -Yoink!-.
On topic:
A new game deserves to be NEW. Paying for a replica of an older game is why I have stopped buying games from the Call of Duty series.
So you’d take something that you’ve partly played that you know work to some extent (it’s possible that a Halo 3.5 won’t go well with the rest of the playing community) over something that has the potential to become better than Halo 3 competatively? (which may also not go well with the rest of the playing community)
> I agree that the ranking system 1-50 should return, and within the ranked playlists there should be more classic gametypes than vanilla Halo 4. Mainly because I want ranked to be as competetive as it can be made.
Waaaait wait wait…
How do you know Halo 4 won’t be more competative than the other Halos?
Yes, halo 3 was a successful game. So was halo 2, as well as Halo 1. Heck even Reach was successful… we know this, thank you. Halo 4 will stay true to the core game play of Halo, as it always has. But I’m not going to dish out $60 for a game I already have, besides the fact that it looks better.
> > Yeah, I have a problem with that.
> >
> > I would MUCH rather have Reach 2 than H3.5
> >
> > YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?
>
> Yes I do, as Reach was awful.
Reach on it’s worst day beats the Dueling Wielding, BR crushing, no health bar, no fall damage, lagtastic, yawn inducing play of H3, ANY DAY.
> > > Yeah, I have a problem with that.
> > >
> > > I would MUCH rather have Reach 2 than H3.5
> > >
> > > YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?
> >
> > Yes I do, as Reach was awful.
>
> Reach on it’s worst day beats the Dueling Wielding, BR crushing, no health bar, no fall damage, lagtastic, yawn inducing play of H3, ANY DAY.
>
> Come at me Bro.
Halo 3 in a game with red bar connection destroys Reach’s, awful one weapon sandbox, sniper DMR, health bar, fall damage, kill barriers, armor lock, boring multiplayer maps, awful art direction, bland forge, casual gameplay, ranking system(lol), playlists, bloom, firefight, campaign, armor perms, voting system, just basically everything to be honest.
But Halo 3 is the worst out of the trilogy, and it easily destroys reach. If you want a game thats light years ahead of reach then you’re looking at Halo 2.
> > > Yeah, I have a problem with that.
> > >
> > > I would MUCH rather have Reach 2 than H3.5
> > >
> > > YOU GOT A PROBLEM WITH THAT?
> >
> > Yes I do, as Reach was awful.
>
> Reach on it’s worst day beats the Dueling Wielding, BR crushing, no health bar, no fall damage, lagtastic, yawn inducing play of H3, ANY DAY.
>
> Come at me Bro.
Get a Grip on Reality, Reach was a mess probally the worst halo game ever. You could tell Bungie put no effort into the game Half of them were Made in forge world the day before lol. Requests that we wanted (Like Drivable Pelican in forge) Was igorned, the Campaign was not up to standard. Bloom as a Horrilbe Game feature. The vechicals we Made out of Paper which destroyed BTB and Vechical Combat. Almost Every Single Armor abillity was broken. Invasion was so boring, Map Packs were Average. The ranking system was a JOKE taken Straight out of COD, it was Literally going backwards.
The Custom Games communitity were destroyed (Since Options were Taken Out /Aplha Zombie). Despite UPROAR from the fans, Bungie did nothing and Silenced anyone who complained.
When Reach is Compaired to Halo 3, it is really NO contest. Halo 3 is just a class above reach. Game Set & Match.
Halo 2 was actually the worst Halo just saying. Halo Reach was far more polished than that game could ever hope to be in fact Halo 3 only exists to make up for the mistake that was Halo 2.
Yes I do have a problem with that. I have a problem of it being Halo CE 2, Halo 2.5, Halo 3.5, or Reach 2. In fact, what I really want it to be, is Halo 4.
Halo 4, should be Halo 4, it shouldn’t be the same as any other game, it should be it’s OWN game.
> Halo 2 was actually the worst Halo just saying. Halo Reach was far more polished than that game could ever hope to be in fact Halo 3 only exists to make up for the mistake that was Halo 2.
Yes Halo 2 was the worst Halo. Thats why people kept their xbox’s on a month after the original Xbox Live was supposed to shut down so it kept Halo 2 alive. Thats why Halo 2 was on top of Xbox Live even AFTER the Xbox 360 was released. Thats why Halo 2 always had custom games going, whether it be zombies, ffa, or glitching. It was so bad it even spawned a professional video game league.
> Halo 2 was actually the worst Halo just saying. Halo Reach was far more polished than that game could ever hope to be in fact Halo 3 only exists to make up for the mistake that was Halo 2.