- Tibetz
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
____________(˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜˜)_∏______
l | --------____.`=====.-.~:________\___|================[oo]
|_|||___/___/_/~```|_|_|_|``(o)----------<)
Posted by: Po0f MoNk3y
Posted by: Tibetz
Posted by: mister arbiter
why not?
because Killzone = Call of duty.
Also, Killzone and Call of Duty aren't Halo. Total gameplay revamps just aren't a good idea, regardless of how "good" of an idea you think they are. the game would cease to be Halo.
Just like the implimentation of Dual Wielding and Equipment, right? Totally not Halo if those things were implimented.. Oh wait.
I think the OP is saying to make the game "grittier", not to turn it into Killzone 2. I wouldn't mind if a grenade went off in front of me and bits of dirt blew onto my visor, or animations were a bit more dynamic.
Really, people need to stop with the whole "NO! NEW IDEAS WILL NOT BE HALO!" thing, considering nobody knows what Reach will be like aside from the fact that it's going to be an FPS. For all we know Bungie is working on a heavy "squad based", or "Massive scale battle" game, and all the people who are against such things with their closed minds could potentially be terribly disappointed. It's people who hate change that are the reasons games like Psychonauts failed.
I'm pretty indifferent to what Bungie choses to do at this point, as I trust Bungie enough to do their best to make the game awesome no matter how it turns out.
Not my intention.
What I meant was no, don't change the core gameplay. If you fuse it with Killzone or Call of Duty or Battlefield, sure we may get a better game, but it isn't Halo. It's Call of Duty 500 years into the future.