Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: For People Who Don't Want Classes
  • Subject: For People Who Don't Want Classes
Subject: For People Who Don't Want Classes
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

And?

Since when does selecting a player class = Battlefield?

  • 08.01.2009 6:58 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: CheesyPuffs
Posted by: Lunatic__Brandon
How about no? The game needs to be designed around the classic Halo gameplay. Maybe they could have 1 playlist with classes.


They are not going to design a whole entire class system for Halo 3, then only use it in a tiny portion of the game. Also I find it hilarious that despite the OP stating specifically to NOT say "If you want classes go play COD or BF", that's exactly what half the people are saying. Also, the fact that there are no classes and highly dangerous weapons are left lying around, is what makes Halo, Halo. Adding a class based system would be needed if people were not playing Halo MP anymore, and it needed something really different from normal Halo (i.e.:


Halo doesn't need a class based system at all

  • 08.01.2009 6:59 AM PDT

http://achievementgen.info/view.php?ach=22555

Posted by: Flankenstein5150
And?

Since when does selecting a player class = Battlefield?

It equals Battlefield,star wars battle front,Cod and a lot of others.

because you have to stick to the class you chose.

[Edited on 08.01.2009 7:02 AM PDT]

  • 08.01.2009 7:02 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

You really need to play more games then I guess. Selecting a player class is not the defining aspect of the Battlefield series. Day of Defeat, Team Fortress Classic, and Battlefield 1942 all allow you to select a class when you spawn and those three games are all entirely different.

What about Aliens vs Predator? Rainbow Six?

Play more games before you people come in here saying "I want to play Halo not Battlefield" when you hear that you can "select a class" in the new Halo game. Selecting a class != Battlefield

  • 08.01.2009 7:11 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Lets look at another game series. Call of Duty.

First you could choose your starting weapon, then you could classes and finally you could completely change your starting set-up. Now those are some pretty big gameplay changes but they all rest along the same basic fundamentals. The sequels played differently but they still felt like they belonged to the same series.

Now Halo has always been about spawning as equals and fighting for advantages. If Bungie can find a way to revolutionize that system than I will welcome it but incorparating classes into Halo is preposterous because it destroys the game's fundamentals. Change is good as long as it is the right change.

[Edited on 08.01.2009 7:20 AM PDT]

  • 08.01.2009 7:20 AM PDT

One thing that I think people are missing is that Bungie does not copy other people. Bungie are the ones who set the bar, not rush up to meet it.

If they are going to implement a class based system, expect it to look nothing like any other game's class based system.

  • 08.01.2009 7:23 AM PDT

Signatures are for squares.

We do not need classes in Halo. Why? Because it's perfectly fine AS IS. If it ain't broken don't fix it.

Classes seriously ruin a game for alot of people. If Bungie chooses to implement a class system like in CoD, then it will ruin the game for casual players. Those people who play the game 24/7 will have better weapons than those who play just for fun. That's what Bungie was always about, Fun for the casual player. Then if Bungie chooses to use a class system like Team Fortress 2, then Halo will be plauged with people who spam a certain class, like why would you play as someone who starts with an AR, when you can start with Rockets or Sniper?

Halo is about everyone starting equal, everyone spawns with the same weapons and health. The team who can get the power weapons will have map control, and it takes a good team to recover those weapons back. Implementing classes would be the worst mistake of Bungie's career, because it's a massive step backwards, and it would make Halo less unique.

  • 08.01.2009 7:30 AM PDT

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME GROUP INVITATIONS

The Halo REACH Script (post thoughts in thread)

Writing Lead of Whisper Studios. Check out Heron!

Look... I'm on bungiepedia!

Posted by: privet caboose
Classes seriously ruin a game for alot of people. If Bungie chooses to implement a class system like in CoD, then it will ruin the game for casual players. Those people who play the game 24/7 will have better weapons than those who play just for fun.
Um, I highly doubt that Bungie would use an unlockable system for their weapons. That would be stupid. Everyone would have equal access to all classes/weapons from the start.

That's what Bungie was always about, Fun for the casual player. Then if Bungie chooses to use a class system like Team Fortress 2, then Halo will be plauged with people who spam a certain class, like why would you play as someone who starts with an AR, when you can start with Rockets or Sniper? Maybe the AR/BR guy is well rounded, while the Sniper is very weak and cannot operate at close range, or the guy with rockets is very slow and cannot operate at mid-long range (unless they had the skill to do so, of course).

Halo is about everyone starting equal, everyone spawns with the same weapons and health. The team who can get the power weapons will have map control, and it takes a good team to recover those weapons back. Implementing classes would be the worst mistake of Bungie's career, because it's a massive step backwards, and it would make Halo less unique. Halo is not the only game where you fight over map and weapon control, yet it is still unique because it has a distinct Halo fell. The same would be the case if bungie made this game class-based.

  • 08.01.2009 8:56 AM PDT

You are lame...

To the OP a Halo game made by Bungie won't have classes. It just won't, Bungie isn't going to fix something that isn't broken.

  • 08.01.2009 8:59 AM PDT

ARRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGG! CoD is NOT CLASSED BASED! Sure, you can make your own classes if you want but you dont have to. Team Fortress 1&2 are class based games. SW: Battlefront is class based.

  • 08.01.2009 10:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I love Battlefield 1943 but I love Halo more thats why I dont want Halo to be a class game see what I maen class games are fun but Halo gameplay is better

  • 08.01.2009 10:43 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: cpt falcon911
NO ONE WANTS HALO REACH TO BE A HYBRID OF BATTLEFIELD.


I do.

*Amusedly nullifies point*

  • 08.01.2009 10:58 AM PDT

Okay I need to restart some of this. Some people just don't get it. I don't know, maybe they can't read or something. That's probably it.

I'm looking forward to Reach. If it's just like Halo 3, I'll still buy it. I'll take it home and pour hours and hours into it. Even if it's almost exactly the same. But ideally I'd like something different. Now some of you are acting like I'm holding a gun to Jason Jones' head and telling him that it has to be my way or else. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying Reach has to have classes. I'm not even necessarily saying Reach SHOULD have classes. I'm saying that it COULD. There's no reason it couldn't. It wouldn't ruin anything.

Now one of the problems here is that reading comprehension seems to be at an all time low in this forum. Maybe it's the American education system that's failed us. I wouldn't be surprised. I've said time and time again NOT to compare these ideas of "classes" to CoD. I'll say it again just to increase my chances of that actually being read. *ahem*

DO NOT USE THE CALL OF DUTY GAMES AS AN EXAMPLE OF CLASSES.

DO NOT USE THE CALL OF DUTY GAMES AS AN EXAMPLE OF CLASSES.

One more time.

DO NOT USE THE CALL OF DUTY GAMES AS AN EXAMPLE OF CLASSES.

Get it? Probably not. I won't be surprised. Team Fortress has classes. Battlefield has classes. Star Wars Battlefront has classes. No class is better than another class. Each class has advantages. People don't spam a single class. Some classes have more players than others, sure, but you must have serious problems if you honestly believe that everything would be spread out exactly evenly. These classes are not customizable. You have a set loadout, and those are the weapons you have until you die and possibly decide to change your class. BF1943 even lets you switch weapons with a dead person. No class is better than another. They all specialize well in different and overlapping areas.

And some people say "Bungie will not go along with the trend of other games and they will be completely original." Well excuse me for forgetting my videogame history where Bungie invented the FPS.

Oh wait, they didn't. But their FPS was UNIQUE. It was better than other FPSs, and it set the trend for suture shooter games. Just like if they made a shooter that had classes, like Battlefront or Team Fortress style classes, NOT Call of Duty classes, then I'm sure, considering the high quality of developer that they are, that they would make it as UNIQUE as possible and try to make it BETTER than other shooters with a similar style. And it doesn't mean ALL Halo games suddenly have to conform to that style and that the entire franchise will abandon it's arena-style shooter fans.

So even if you disagree with me in thinking that Reach being a class-based shooter would be the best choice, denying that such a game set in the Halo universe would be any good is ignorant at best. The Halo universe is a perfect setting for TONS of different games. We've already had shooters and even an RTS. How about a flight sim like Rogue Squadron, with Longswords and Shortswords and even more craft. Or a third-person squad-based or R6V style shooter? I thought ODST would have been perfect for that, but I'm not disappointed with what we're getting. A stealth game? Why not? Bungie has clearly put enough love and detail into their universe to support projects in those veins.

So to everyone who agrees with me and is supporting my points, thank you.

To everyone who disagrees with me and has valid arguments and concerns, thank you.

To everyone who repeats eachother and continually shows that they are incapable of basic reading skills and a coherent debate, please learn to read.

And also,

STOP USING CALL OF DUTY AS AN EXAMPLE OF CLASSES

[Edited on 08.01.2009 4:16 PM PDT]

  • 08.01.2009 4:05 PM PDT

And apparently there was a mass brain explosion.

  • 08.01.2009 6:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Brent G
And apparently there was a mass brain explosion.


READ THIS

Lets look at another game series. Call of Duty.

First you could choose your starting weapon, then you could classes and finally you could completely change your starting set-up. Now those are some pretty big gameplay changes but they all rest along the same basic fundamentals. The sequels played differently but they still felt like they belonged to the same series.

Now Halo has always been about spawning as equals and fighting for advantages. If Bungie can find a way to revolutionize that system than I will welcome it but incorparating classes into Halo is preposterous because it destroys the game's fundamentals. Change is good as long as it is the right change.

  • 08.01.2009 6:04 PM PDT

Posted by: Mr Secksy Man
I can't let it go, I'm trying to talk to you but for some reason you can't hear me due to all those dicks in my mouth.

Posted by: Brent G
I'm not saying that. I'm not saying Reach has to have classes. I'm not even necessarily saying Reach SHOULD have classes. I'm saying that it COULD. There's no reason it couldn't. It wouldn't ruin anything.

Get it? Probably not. I won't be surprised. Team Fortress has classes. Battlefield has classes. Star Wars Battlefront has classes. No class is better than another class. Each class has advantages. People don't spam a single class. Some classes have more players than others, sure, but you must have serious problems if you honestly believe that everything would be spread out exactly evenly. These classes are not customizable. You have a set loadout, and those are the weapons you have until you die and possibly decide to change your class. BF1943 even lets you switch weapons with a dead person. No class is better than another. They all specialize well in different and overlapping areas.


Much of the fun in Halo is the fight over key positions and weapons to win the game, because to win, you need map control. This is all thanks to the beginning equality of the players and the lure of power weapons scattered around the map. On The Pit, much of the fight is based around the rockets, sword, and sniper. This generally affects the way players think while playing, because if the other team gets their hands on a power weapon first (or indeed, later in the game), it could be a turning point for the match.

So what do players do? They control the area around said power weapons, be it by long or close range, to keep the enemies from getting it.

Now imagine Halo with a class system. The fight for key locations and weapons is gone. Anybody can spawn with whatever they want - sniper, rockets, etc. It's merely chaos, with people running around killing each other with no strategy, communication, or teamwork, merely hoping that their teammates don't suck and they'll win the game.

Basically, you'd be turning Halo into Battlefield, CoD,or Star Wars, but with a differet look to it. which would suck.

And some people say "Bungie will not go along with the trend of other games and they will be completely original." Well excuse me for forgetting my videogame history where Bungie invented the FPS.
Bungie revolutionized the FPS.

Oh wait, they didn't. But their FPS was UNIQUE. It was better than other FPSs, and it set the trend for suture shooter games. Just like if they made a shooter that had classes, like Battlefront or Team Fortress style classes, NOT Call of Duty classes, then I'm sure, considering the high quality of developer that they are, that they would make it as UNIQUE as possible and try to make it BETTER than other shooters with a similar style. And it doesn't mean ALL Halo games suddenly have to conform to that style and that the entire franchise will abandon it's arena-style shooter fans.

No, it doesn't necessarily mean that the whole franchise will follow suit, but it's been 3 years since the last Halo game, and I'd be damn pissed if it was merely an improved Battlefield or Star Wars Battlefront with a new skin.

Plus, you can only modify class based systems so far. The class based system is a ridiculously limited system - it's nearly impossible to be completely original with one at this point.

So even if you disagree with me in thinking that Reach being a class-based shooter would be the best choice, denying that such a game set in the Halo universe would be any good is ignorant at best. The Halo universe is a perfect setting for TONS of different games. We've already had shooters and even an RTS. How about a flight sim like Rogue Squadron, with Longswords and Shortswords and even more craft. Or a third-person squad-based or R6V style shooter? I thought ODST would have been perfect for that, but I'm not disappointed with what we're getting. A stealth game? Why not? Bungie has clearly put enough love and detail into their universe to support projects in those veins.


Different games like that would be spinoffs at best. I'd be fine if they did that, as long as the main part of the franchise stuck with it's current style of shooter.

  • 08.01.2009 7:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Hylebos
One thing that I think people are missing is that Bungie does not copy other people. Bungie are the ones who set the bar, not rush up to meet it.
This is the funniest thing that I've ever read, considering how much Halo rips from the Alien series. Of course Bungie borrows things from other sources, it's what everyone does to a certain extent.

I don't understand some of these complaints about the classes at all. Apparently having a class system implemented in Halo: Reach will instantly transform it into a clone of Battlefield. That's like saying "Firefight mode! ODST IS GONNA BE GOW 2!" No, it's not. And I don't exactly see how saying that is supposed to be a negative anyhow. "STOP WORKING OUT, YOU'RE GOING TO BE A CLONE OF A BODYBUILDER! HAVE SOME FREAKIN' ORIGINALITY BY STAYING THE SAME!"

  • 08.01.2009 7:46 PM PDT

Posted by: Mr Secksy Man
I can't let it go, I'm trying to talk to you but for some reason you can't hear me due to all those dicks in my mouth.

Posted by: Double Entendre
Posted by: Hylebos
One thing that I think people are missing is that Bungie does not copy other people. Bungie are the ones who set the bar, not rush up to meet it.
This is the funniest thing that I've ever read, considering how much Halo rips from the Alien series. Of course Bungie borrows things from other sources, it's what everyone does to a certain extent.


I disagree. Bungie "stole" hardly anything from the Alien series. ZOMG THERE R ALIENZ! AND TEH LITTLE INFECTION PODS!

So? That doesn't mean it was ripped from the alien series. The similarities are minimal at most.

I don't understand some of these complaints about the classes at all. Apparently having a class system implemented in Halo: Reach will instantly transform it into a clone of Battlefield. That's like saying "Firefight mode! ODST IS GONNA BE GOW 2!" No, it's not. And I don't exactly see how saying that is supposed to be a negative anyhow. "STOP WORKING OUT, YOU'RE GOING TO BE A CLONE OF A BODYBUILDER! HAVE SOME FREAKIN' ORIGINALITY BY STAYING THE SAME!"

You miss the point, though. Much of Halo's distinct feel and fun factor comes from the fact that it's not a class system. Reading the post above yours should help.

  • 08.01.2009 8:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The funny thing is that if the game has class system similar to Battlefield or Team Fortress, a lot of these people against the idea would end up loving it. It's just how Halo fanboys are, they won't like something unless it's actually in the game. The ironic thing is that if you complain about the class system after it's announced to be in the game, they'll flame you to death.

Hypothetically speaking of course.

Posted by: Anti 007
It just won't, Bungie isn't going to fix something that isn't broken.
I could say the same thing about the changes from Halo 1 to Halo 2 and 3.

[Edited on 08.03.2009 6:07 PM PDT]

  • 08.01.2009 8:17 PM PDT

Posted by: Lunatic__Brandon
Posted by: Brent G
And apparently there was a mass brain explosion.


READ THIS

Lets look at another game series. Call of Duty.

First you could choose your starting weapon, then you could classes and finally you could completely change your starting set-up. Now those are some pretty big gameplay changes but they all rest along the same basic fundamentals. The sequels played differently but they still felt like they belonged to the same series.

Now Halo has always been about spawning as equals and fighting for advantages. If Bungie can find a way to revolutionize that system than I will welcome it but incorparating classes into Halo is preposterous because it destroys the game's fundamentals. Change is good as long as it is the right change.


Okay, well I'd rather not do that. I've been trying to steer away from those games, oh, about 6 times. In the last post. Alone. But if we must. You have good points. The solution to the problem is that it wouldn't play like another Halo game. It would be a spinoff. Again, outlined in the original post. So if it played radically differently it wouldn't be a big deal.

Posted by: Deaths Friend22
Posted by: Brent G
I'm not saying that. I'm not saying Reach has to have classes. I'm not even necessarily saying Reach SHOULD have classes. I'm saying that it COULD. There's no reason it couldn't. It wouldn't ruin anything.

Get it? Probably not. I won't be surprised. Team Fortress has classes. Battlefield has classes. Star Wars Battlefront has classes. No class is better than another class. Each class has advantages. People don't spam a single class. Some classes have more players than others, sure, but you must have serious problems if you honestly believe that everything would be spread out exactly evenly. These classes are not customizable. You have a set loadout, and those are the weapons you have until you die and possibly decide to change your class. BF1943 even lets you switch weapons with a dead person. No class is better than another. They all specialize well in different and overlapping areas.


Much of the fun in Halo is the fight over key positions and weapons to win the game, because to win, you need map control. This is all thanks to the beginning equality of the players and the lure of power weapons scattered around the map. On The Pit, much of the fight is based around the rockets, sword, and sniper. This generally affects the way players think while playing, because if the other team gets their hands on a power weapon first (or indeed, later in the game), it could be a turning point for the match.

So what do players do? They control the area around said power weapons, be it by long or close range, to keep the enemies from getting it.

Now imagine Halo with a class system. The fight for key locations and weapons is gone. Anybody can spawn with whatever they want - sniper, rockets, etc. It's merely chaos, with people running around killing each other with no strategy, communication, or teamwork, merely hoping that their teammates don't suck and they'll win the game.

Basically, you'd be turning Halo into Battlefield, CoD,or Star Wars, but with a differet look to it. which would suck.


Okay, games like Battlefield, which I use as my main example, are built ENTIRELY around the concept of control. Control of territory, not weapons. Saying one is better than the other is opinion. And having a Halo game that plays like Battlefield would not be bad. How could it?

Good mechanics + good concept/setting = good game

Again, it works as a spinoff.

Posted by: Deaths Friend22

Bungie revolutionized the FPS.


Yes, that would be essentially the same thing I said.

Posted by: Deaths Friend22
No, it doesn't necessarily mean that the whole franchise will follow suit, but it's been 3 years since the last Halo game, and I'd be damn pissed if it was merely an improved Battlefield or Star Wars Battlefront with a new skin.

Plus, you can only modify class based systems so far. The class based system is a ridiculously limited system - it's nearly impossible to be completely original with one at this point.


First, it's been two years, and when Reach comes out, ODST will have been out for only 1 year.

Posted by: Deaths Friend22
Different games like that would be spinoffs at best. I'd be fine if they did that, as long as the main part of the franchise stuck with it's current style of shooter.


This we can agree on, although I'm a bit more willing to let the franchise branch out completely from here if you want to. Having a trilogy of very very similar games is enough. It might be time to move on from there.

Posted by: Deaths Friend22
Posted by: Double Entendre
Posted by: Hylebos
One thing that I think people are missing is that Bungie does not copy other people. Bungie are the ones who set the bar, not rush up to meet it.
This is the funniest thing that I've ever read, considering how much Halo rips from the Alien series. Of course Bungie borrows things from other sources, it's what everyone does to a certain extent.


I disagree. Bungie "stole" hardly anything from the Alien series. ZOMG THERE R ALIENZ! AND TEH LITTLE INFECTION PODS!

So? That doesn't mean it was ripped from the alien series. The similarities are minimal at most.

I don't understand some of these complaints about the classes at all. Apparently having a class system implemented in Halo: Reach will instantly transform it into a clone of Battlefield. That's like saying "Firefight mode! ODST IS GONNA BE GOW 2!" No, it's not. And I don't exactly see how saying that is supposed to be a negative anyhow. "STOP WORKING OUT, YOU'RE GOING TO BE A CLONE OF A BODYBUILDER! HAVE SOME FREAKIN' ORIGINALITY BY STAYING THE SAME!"

You miss the point, though. Much of Halo's distinct feel and fun factor comes from the fact that it's not a class system. Reading the post above yours should help.


Influences are obvious, I'm sure Halo borrowed from Aliens. It also has similarities to StarCraft. There are numerous others. There's even an old sci-fi book called Ringworld! Guess what it's about? Halo's origins are not necessarily original. How the influences have been used in the direction and purpose of the story are.

And fun factor? The only way we know how to play Halo is the three similar games we've been given. Halo Wars still has the feel of Halo even though it's a vastly different game. Having another game that keeps the style but plays differently would still very much be FUN. It's Bungie! They don't make bad games. And again, it's a spinoff. It doesn't need to be Halo 4.

  • 08.01.2009 8:59 PM PDT

Posted by: Mr Secksy Man
I can't let it go, I'm trying to talk to you but for some reason you can't hear me due to all those dicks in my mouth.

Posted by: Brent G
Okay, games like Battlefield, which I use as my main example, are built ENTIRELY around the concept of control. Control of territory, not weapons. Saying one is better than the other is opinion. And having a Halo game that plays like Battlefield would not be bad. How could it?

Good mechanics + good concept/setting = good game


The difference is that the key points in Halo are diverse every game, based on the weapons controlled by both teams, as opposed to mere territory advantages in Battlefield.

Plus, a player has to go out of his way to get the weapons he needs in Halo as opposed to simply changing his class and getting whatever he wants on his next respawn.

Again, it works as a spinoff.
Assuming the game is based off of The Fall of Reach, the game is a prequel, not a spinoff. Much like the Star Wars Trilogy.

Posted by: Deaths Friend22
No, it doesn't necessarily mean that the whole franchise will follow suit, but it's been 3 years since the last Halo game, and I'd be damn pissed if it was merely an improved Battlefield or Star Wars Battlefront with a new skin.

Plus, you can only modify class based systems so far. The class based system is a ridiculously limited system - it's nearly impossible to be completely original with one at this point.


First, it's been two years, and when Reach comes out, ODST will have been out for only 1 year.

First, you know what I meant, and ODST is an expansion, not an entirely new game.
Second, you didn't acknowledge the point on how limited class systems are. Do you agree?


And fun factor? The only way we know how to play Halo is the three similar games we've been given. Halo Wars still has the feel of Halo even though it's a vastly different game. Having another game that keeps the style but plays differently would still very much be FUN. It's Bungie! They don't make bad games. And again, it's a spinoff. It doesn't need to be Halo 4.

I've played Halo Wars exactly 1 time, and I felt like I was playing Xbox Age of Empires, not Halo. :/

[Edited on 08.01.2009 10:03 PM PDT]

  • 08.01.2009 10:00 PM PDT

Here’s what Luke had to say about the differences in treatment between the Spartans and Elites in Reach:

“Instead of piece-by-piece customization like the Spartans, Elite customization is a full model swap with models selected from the various Elite classes appearing throughout the Campaign. There are all kinds of reasons for this, not the least of which is our continued emphasis on the Spartan as your identity in Reach.”

Posted by: Brent G
And for everyone who's gonna come in here and whine about "But this is Halo, not COD or Battlefield, waaaaaaaah, Halo is about X or Y and should never be changed!! :( :( :( :( :(", This is not the Halo trilogy. That is over. Go play Halo 3. It's the culmination of all the stuff you want to play. You've played it for two years now and you clearly don't want anything new. So play that game. Or ask Bungie to remake it with better graphics because that's clearly the only change that won't make you cry. Halo can branch out.
Are you kidding? Bungie added loads to Halo 3. And the best part about your argument is it mirrors your opponent's. You are just saying that you want a change, simply because you like it. A change like this could be catastrophic. I don't want to play a class based game, there are, as you said, plenty of those. I want to play halo, which is not based on classes.

  • 08.01.2009 10:24 PM PDT

Posted by: Deaths Friend22
First, you know what I meant, and ODST is an expansion, not an entirely new game.
Second, you didn't acknowledge the point on how limited class systems are. Do you agree?


Well see I believe ODST has been described as expanding so much it's being considered essentially it's own game, with Halo 3's matchmaking. But yes I suppose it is still an expansion, but I figure it's enough to tide over most rabid Halo fans, at least until Reach. As for classes, I do agree they can be limited, but could you elaborate on that? I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean. Also, out of curiosity, have you played BF1943? It only has three classes, but they balance remarkably well. It's one of the things that made me think a similar game with a Bungie/Halo twist would still be fresh and superior to other shooters of the same kind.

Posted by: Uncle Kulikov
Posted by: Brent G
And for everyone who's gonna come in here and whine about "But this is Halo, not COD or Battlefield, waaaaaaaah, Halo is about X or Y and should never be changed!! :( :( :( :( :(", This is not the Halo trilogy. That is over. Go play Halo 3. It's the culmination of all the stuff you want to play. You've played it for two years now and you clearly don't want anything new. So play that game. Or ask Bungie to remake it with better graphics because that's clearly the only change that won't make you cry. Halo can branch out.

Are you kidding? Bungie added loads to Halo 3. And the best part about your argument is it mirrors your opponent's. You are just saying that you want a change, simply because you like it. A change like this could be catastrophic. I don't want to play a class based game, there are, as you said, plenty of those. I want to play halo, which is not based on classes.


I know they added loads to Halo 3. I'm saying it sounds like people don't want them to add loads to Reach. Like a BR tune up and playing as 6 year old MC is the amazing gameplay revolution some fans want. I want a change because I've seen changes can work, and they help keep the franchise fresh. Will Reach be radically different? Maybe not. I'm sure I'll still like it if it doesn't. But eventually it gets tiring. Look at Call of Duty (yes, remarkably I'm using it as an example :P). Can you imagine how pissed off fans would be if EVERY game in the series so far was set in WW2? Their answer was not to change gameplay, but the setting. And that worked for them. Call of Duty has no self-contained universe. It's set in reality, or at least quasi-reality. So a Call of Duty game has to play specifically one way. So what worked was to split the franchise into historical entries, and now a sub-series that has original stories set in modern and near-future events. I have a feeling COD7 may abandon WW2 as well, because that time period in many games has gotten stale.

Now just changing the setting in Halo may not work so well. I mean Reach is in the books, and it's described pretty much the same way you'd describe Earth. And I do consider it a spinoff. not a prequel, although I agree it could be viewed either way. What it really is will become more evident when more information about the game is revealed.

Which is why I think a gameplay change would be welcome. Halo is ripe for spinoffs. It will never be milking as long as the games are quality. And an IP like Halo is so huge it has the infrastructure for almost every genre of videogame.

  • 08.01.2009 11:29 PM PDT

Armor Lock isn't overpowered. You just suck at Reach :)

Reach isn't bad, you're just a BK :)

For my gamertag, look up "Ghoulishtie"

No classes.

Dont want call of halo.

Halo is not the kind of game to have classes in.

  • 08.01.2009 11:57 PM PDT

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME GROUP INVITATIONS

The Halo REACH Script (post thoughts in thread)

Writing Lead of Whisper Studios. Check out Heron!

Look... I'm on bungiepedia!

Posted by: IIGhoulishtieII
No classes.

Dont want call of halo.

Halo is not the kind of game to have classes in.
Right now Halo isn't "Call of Halo" but it is a Quake clone, according to the logic used on these forums.

  • 08.01.2009 11:59 PM PDT