- MLG Cheehwawa
- |
- Fabled Mythic Member
The hilarious thing about this is most of you would be saying the same exact thing you are now to "keep Halo as Halo" if the game involved perks from the beginning, and someone was trying to take them away and make Halo more like what it is today.
Even I, someone whose favorite game is Halo: Combat Evolved, would not mind a class-based Halo.
Think of it like how Halo Wars was to the other Halo games in terms of gameplay. It was a new genre. It was not trying to take the classic formula and molest it in some way. It was making a new type of game which was still distinctly simple, innovative, and unique. Halo.
That said, Halo is Halo. It is unique. Every game is. The genre does not matter. Was Halo Wars an Age of Empires clone just because it was also an RTS? No. Would Halo Reach be a clone of Team Fortress 2 if it emplyed classes? No.
It would still have the classic Halo spin.
Was Halo 1 (or 2/3 for that matter) a clone of Quake? No? You say this, yet Halo borrowed the same basic gameplay mechanics. Spawn fair, fight over key points and weapons which spawn around the map.
What's that? "But Halo added a lot!," you say? Now why do you assume that Halo would not once again add a lot to a new genre (class based first person shooter) of games?