You just hate change, don't you?

A lot of people say “you don’t want change” or “you just hate change” when people express their anger at 343i for these changes to halo. Well, I’m gonna debunk that now. Here are some things I think most people would be fine with changing that would actually be meaningful while keeping halo’s identity:

  1. A mid range/long range auto weapon. It would obviously be a power weapon. The weapon sandbox has been lacking this for a while.

  2. Some sort of creative and new heavy weapon. I can’t come up with any specifics, but what about a mine launcher? Or a mass emp gun? Something creative that would expand the weapon sandbox.

  3. Dynamic map elements. I haven’t seen anyone complain about these, and I feel that they would heavily add layers of depth due to needing communication and skill to utilize properly. Just make them not “press button to kill entire enemy team.”

  4. New grenade types. What about an emp grenade? Or a grenade that makes a temporary hole in the geometry of a level? Again, something creative and new.

  5. Training mode. Play against different difficulty levels of bots to practice aiming, weapon timing, map control, spawn locations, etc. Obviously would not have any XP or rank benefits for doing it. It would also be nice for those with poor internet connections.

These are some changes I thought up in 10 minutes, and none of them involve changing what halo is. Now can you stop using that argument that if you hate those changes, you hate all changes?

Bump because people need to stop using this argument.

So…you want new weapons and gametypes. Basically reinforcing the same stereotype the people making the argument have of you to begin with.

> 5. Training mode. Play against different difficulty levels of bots to practice aiming, weapon timing, map control, spawn locations, etc. Obviously would not have any XP or rank benefits for doing it. It would also be nice for those with poor internet connections.

Yes, it is indeed about time Halo catches up to the standards of even 90’s shooters.

> Now can you stop using that argument that if you hate those changes, you hate all changes?

Of course people aren’t going to hate optional additions.

Off-topic expansion is the last thing the sandbox needs at this point.

> 2533274819302824;3:
> So…you want new weapons and gametypes. Basically reinforcing the same stereotype the people making the argument have of you to begin with.

No I don’t just want new weapons and gametypes, I want them to explore the other mechanic of dynamic maps. It seems to be working, so why not run with it? Also, what about boats (finally)? An all out UNSC/Covenant sea battle would be awesome, no? That hardly seems like it reinforces a stereotype of hating change.

> 2533274819302824;3:
> > Now can you stop using that argument that if you hate those changes, you hate all changes?
>
>
>
> Not even the argument people are making. Of course people aren’t going to hate optional additions.
>
> Off-topic expansion is the last thing the sandbox needs at this point.

That is exactly the argument I see so many people making; I realize you may not, but some people are literally saying that. And that was on-topic, don’t worry lol. I disagree, however, and say this- isn’t that exactly what Halo 5 is doing (albeit IMO in a not so meaningful or creative way)? It’s what literally every game has done since Halo CE. Just, the ones that focused on movement/ability expansion weren’t as well liked because they don’t add to the game in a meaningful way. As in, they are detrimental to the identity of the game series.