Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Change, well, change isn't always good.
  • Subject: Change, well, change isn't always good.
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Change, well, change isn't always good.

Edit: I didn't really mean to write a "W411 0f t3xt", but I guess I got lost in the writing of it. Be prepared, it's not a one-liner!

I've visited this forum a couple times in the past, just a quick stop on the way to my normal home on this site, and have been imaginatively run out when I leave it. Even if, I only visit it for a couple minutes. I'll begin by saying this, some of the users that post here have some great ideas, the ideas are creative, extensive and rather clever from what I normally see come out of this websites general community. And that's great, but let's take a look at something.

We all remember the first three Halos, yes?

Personally, I remember playing every single one, even if I was only seven or eight at the time of playing Halo: CE. They all had a familiar feel to their multiplayer aspects, the arena-style maps with weapons strategically placed (At least for the most part...) around the map.

I will admit, that the idea of having maps such as these, with a slew of weapons scattered around the map was nowhere near original, in fact it was used in many first person shooters prior to this that were not nearly as succesful as Halo CE or any of the following. Customization beyond just color slowly came into effect post Halo CE. But in the end, the basic game play of matchmaking remained the similar throughout the three games.

What Bungie did here was something truly spectacular, at least in my eyes. They were not tempted to throw customizable classes, unlockable equipment into this game because the current gameplay(770,000 games today, what, two weeks after the release of the "Halo Killer" MW2?) works. Have you ever heard the old saying, if it ain't broke don't fix it?

I really hope Bungie knows this saying. I honestly want the multiplay to stay the same. I know, I know, innovation and creativity is key, but this can still be accomplished without ruining the Halo multiplayer we all know and love.

This multiplayer is the most balanced (Yes, I said that.) that I have ever seen. There is no spawning with a power weapon, there is no way to full-proof camp with the way all three Halo's have functioned. You may say some maps are unbalanced, but you always spawn in the same place, and you must constantly be adapting your strategy to outthink and outgun your enemy. You may die once by a camper, but if you know he's there you can lob a few grenades around a corner and pull him out.

Now why change this? People love this? Sure they complain about it being "Random", but other than the AR beatdown, I believe that that is just the fact that people can outthink you, even the worst players, and may in fact outplay you.

With such a simple core concept, the Halo multiplayer manages to remain incredily intricate as you have noticed with the adpatation to MLG and all of their strategies. The same can be seen in regular settings. For example, "camping" the overshield on Guardian can allow you five seconds invincibility. While this may seem rigged, or "cheap" you can adapt by using a sticky, "ninjaing" him or even team shooting.

Yet, here we are, awaiting the next Halo game and I hear people exclaiming that they want all this new stuff in Reach Multiplayer like flyable pelicans, class customizations, perks and many other things that just wouldn't fit in with the classic Halo feel. If I could spawn with juggernaut, would that not upset the balance of BR duels? If I could spawn with Bandolier(Sp? Perk that allowed you to carry more ammo) would that not allow me to overpower the map with the sniper?

Keep it simple. Giving Reach these unnesccesary additions will simply ruin the game we love. I don't want to be playing Call of Duty: Reach. I don't want to be playing Gears of War: Reach. I don't want to playing Rainbow Six: Reach. And I definately do not want to be playing Forza: Reach. I want to be playing Halo: Reach.

Please, Bungie, for our sake and your sake, keep it the Halo we know and love.



[Edited on 11.17.2009 6:21 PM PST]

  • 11.17.2009 6:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

My new B.net account is Grizzled Ancient. If you see him, its me.

dude, if youve ever really spent time here, youll know that whenever someone mentions a CoD type of multiplayer, he gets flamed within the first post

  • 11.17.2009 6:23 PM PDT

Posted by: HappyMeals
Now why change this? People love this? Sure they complain about it being "Random", but other than the AR beatdown, I believe that that is just the fact that people can outthink you, even the worst players, and may in fact outplay you.

The AR beatdown isn't really even all that random... its just a silly tactic. If you are going to even get close to your opponent, you should ensure that your beatdown kills them, otherwise theres no point in getting up close and risking a double beadown.

On topic, I really don't think Bungie is silly enough to mess with the multiplayer that much. If they were planning on making any drastic changes they could have done it in the previous games.

  • 11.17.2009 6:23 PM PDT

I hear what your saying and agree somewhat

  • 11.17.2009 6:24 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: P3P5I
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Achronos
It isn't our shiznit anymore.

Posted by: HappyMeals
I don't want to be playing Call of Duty: Reach. I don't want to be playing Gears of War: Reach. I don't want to playing Rainbow Six: Reach. And I definately do not want to be playing Forza: Reach.

I also do not want to play Halo 3: Reach.

  • 11.17.2009 6:26 PM PDT

I completely agree with the OP.

  • 11.17.2009 6:26 PM PDT

Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: HappyMeals
Now why change this? People love this? Sure they complain about it being "Random", but other than the AR beatdown, I believe that that is just the fact that people can outthink you, even the worst players, and may in fact outplay you.

The AR beatdown isn't really even all that random... its just a silly tactic. If you are going to even get close to your opponent, you should ensure that your beatdown kills them, otherwise theres no point in getting up close and risking a double beadown.

On topic, I really don't think Bungie is silly enough to mess with the multiplayer that much. If they were planning on making any drastic changes they could have done it in the previous games.


Yeah, but I'm fairly certain that they wouldn't, but I'm trying to get a lot of the people around here to understand that a massive overhaul of the actual gameplay mechanics might not really be the best idea.

And I know what you mean about the AR beatdown, but I still think it should be....if you have more health when the beatdown occurs, you don't die.

  • 11.17.2009 6:26 PM PDT

I don't understand why you're looking at my profile. Just back off, and nobody gets hurt, okay?

will you marry me?

OP your post is the best i have seen in a long time. This is exactly how i feel. I think Bungie knows this (hopefully). Halo has a certain feel throughout Halo 1,2, and 3. And it is awesome. The formula works and works dang awesome. Let's stick with it.
^
this is why.

[Edited on 11.17.2009 6:42 PM PST]

  • 11.17.2009 6:38 PM PDT

Halo is great. Bungie is great.

OP your post is the best i have seen in a long time. This is exactly how i feel. I tink Bungie knows this (hopefully). Halo has a certain feel throughout Halo 1,2, and 3. And it is awesome. The formula works and works dang awesome. Let's stick with it.

  • 11.17.2009 6:39 PM PDT

Posted by: HappyMeals
Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: HappyMeals
Now why change this? People love this? Sure they complain about it being "Random", but other than the AR beatdown, I believe that that is just the fact that people can outthink you, even the worst players, and may in fact outplay you.

The AR beatdown isn't really even all that random... its just a silly tactic. If you are going to even get close to your opponent, you should ensure that your beatdown kills them, otherwise theres no point in getting up close and risking a double beadown.

On topic, I really don't think Bungie is silly enough to mess with the multiplayer that much. If they were planning on making any drastic changes they could have done it in the previous games.


Yeah, but I'm fairly certain that they wouldn't, but I'm trying to get a lot of the people around here to understand that a massive overhaul of the actual gameplay mechanics might not really be the best idea.

And I know what you mean about the AR beatdown, but I still think it should be....if you have more health when the beatdown occurs, you don't die.

It how it originally was in Halo 3. People complained that it was unfair because if there was a tiny bit of lag on their end that they would die because they meleed a fraction of a second later than their opponent even though they had the same health. With double deaths its more fair.

  • 11.17.2009 6:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Alzode
  • user homepage:

"Dear Bungie.net, we regret being stubborn bastards, we regret coming to this forum, and we most definitely regret that Darth Kooky blew up our raggedy-ass opinion!"

I agree with you to some extent but the fact is most of us are getting very bored with Halo 3's Matchmaking.

Sure it's still fun. I myself play it almost every day. But it is so repetitive and after 2 years of playing this game and about 7 years of Halo in General, the classic Halo feel has become slightly boring. We need new things to keep us enthralled and Bungie is complying so they won't go in debt from low sales.

The fact of the matter is, Halo 3's Matchmaking will soon be as defunct as Halo 2's Matchmaking and just as underpopulated. With games like Modern Warfare 2, Mass Effect 2, Assassins Creed II, Left 4 Dead 2, Crackdown 2, Borderlands, and a bajillion other titles including new campaigns for the ever-popular GTA IV, Halo 3 will soon be dead. ODST has been out for almost 2 months which will also mark the 4th anniversary of the Xbox 360's release. What is going to keep people from sticking with a 3 year old game when a new Halo game is coming?

Halo: Reach will have to be different from any other Halo title if it's going to survive the eventuality of Gears of War 3. With the Gaming Industry popping out sequels to hit games every other month, Halo will have to hold it's own as the most popular Multiplayer game and right now, Infinity Ward is killing with Modern Warfare 2 but that's to be expected with new games.

In order to keep a public that enjoys the game, Bungie will have to change up the chemistry of Halo to keep up their sales quota and stay in business. And as to your Pelican drivability put-down, shove a sock in it buddy! You know as well as we do that there are ways to incorporate such an awesome feature in Halo: Reach without tipping the balance. Look at ODST. We wanted to play as them since Halo 2. Guess what, Bungie made it happen. Same goes for Firefight, Assembly, Sandbox, Foundry, Heretic, and the Auto Mag (albeit it being useless on shielded Brutes). Bungie listens to the community and grants wishes. Though bots may have been a step too far.

All in all, the Halo formula will need to drastically change if it's to keep up with the competition. With a bit of a change in gameplay and it's reputation, it'll be an early Christmas/Hannukah/Kwanzaa/etc. for Bungie and for us. It really all depends on the beta in early 2010.

  • 11.17.2009 6:43 PM PDT

I agree with the OP. Please do not change the Halo formula just to suit a minority.

  • 11.17.2009 6:43 PM PDT

I completely agree! Keep halo the way it is. You can add some stuff to Reach as long as it doesn't effect the core gameplay too much, thats how I see it. About the flyable pelicans, they wouldn't really be changing the core gameplay. I wouldn't mind flyable pelicans on only very large maps as long as those maps aren't in abundance.

  • 11.17.2009 6:55 PM PDT

Posted by: Darth Kooky

All in all, the Halo formula will need to drastically change if it's to keep up with the competition. With a bit of a change in gameplay and it's reputation, it'll be an early Christmas/Hannukah/Kwanzaa/etc. for Bungie and for us. It really all depends on the beta in early 2010.


Now, you're saying this game needs to drastically change, yet if you haven't noticed, these "Halo Killer" sequels aren't exactly "drastically" changing. Have you played Modern Warefare 2? Besides different perks, guns and killstreaks the multiplayer is basically the same.

The other new titles that have been and will be coming out such as "Left 4 Dead 2" and "Assassin's Creed 2" are all using the same core gameplay mechanics as the previous games as well. This is what made them so good.

Mind you, I'm not saying "CRTL+C" the code from the H3 multiplayer and then "CRTL+V" onto a new disc.

Sure, add new weapons and vehicles. Add new equipment, but keep the idea of Halo. The thing that makes it different then all of the other games that are coming out.

Plus, your argument about how Halo 3 will soon be dead with all of the new titles coming out. Sure, eventually every game dies out if there is nothing new in it, that's why I'm making sure they do Reach right.

  • 11.17.2009 7:20 PM PDT

Posted by: SniperSnake44
Posted by: Darth Kooky

All in all, the Halo formula will need to drastically change if it's to keep up with the competition. With a bit of a change in gameplay and it's reputation, it'll be an early Christmas/Hannukah/Kwanzaa/etc. for Bungie and for us. It really all depends on the beta in early 2010.


Now, you're saying this game needs to drastically change, yet if you haven't noticed, these "Halo Killer" sequels aren't exactly "drastically" changing. Have you played Modern Warefare 2? Besides different perks, guns and killstreaks the multiplayer is basically the same.

The other new titles that have been and will be coming out such as "Left 4 Dead 2" and "Assassin's Creed 2" are all using the same core gameplay mechanics as the previous games as well. This is what made them so good.

Mind you, I'm not saying "CRTL+C" the code from the H3 multiplayer and then "CRTL+V" onto a new disc.

Sure, add new weapons and vehicles. Add new equipment, but keep the idea of Halo. The thing that makes it different then all of the other games that are coming out.

Plus, your argument about how Halo 3 will soon be dead with all of the new titles coming out. Sure, eventually every game dies out if there is nothing new in it, that's why I'm making sure they do Reach right.



That was me, by the way. I posted on my old tag. I swear, I'll never get used to typing this new one out.

  • 11.17.2009 7:23 PM PDT

Totally agree with you, as long as it their is something to distinguish it from halo 3.

  • 11.17.2009 7:48 PM PDT

Posted by: Muckknuckle
will you marry me?

OP your post is the best i have seen in a long time. This is exactly how i feel. I think Bungie knows this (hopefully). Halo has a certain feel throughout Halo 1,2, and 3. And it is awesome. The formula works and works dang awesome. Let's stick with it.
^
this is why.


I appreciate that at least some of the Reach Community agree with me.

  • 11.18.2009 11:03 AM PDT

Da Husk.

Posted by: Darth Kooky
I agree with you to some extent but the fact is most of us are getting very bored with Halo 3's Matchmaking.

Sure it's still fun. I myself play it almost every day. But it is so repetitive and after 2 years of playing this game and about 7 years of Halo in General, the classic Halo feel has become slightly boring. We need new things to keep us enthralled and Bungie is complying so they won't go in debt from low sales.

The fact of the matter is, Halo 3's Matchmaking will soon be as defunct as Halo 2's Matchmaking and just as underpopulated. With games like Modern Warfare 2, Mass Effect 2, Assassins Creed II, Left 4 Dead 2, Crackdown 2, Borderlands, and a bajillion other titles including new campaigns for the ever-popular GTA IV, Halo 3 will soon be dead. ODST has been out for almost 2 months which will also mark the 4th anniversary of the Xbox 360's release. What is going to keep people from sticking with a 3 year old game when a new Halo game is coming?

Halo: Reach will have to be different from any other Halo title if it's going to survive the eventuality of Gears of War 3. With the Gaming Industry popping out sequels to hit games every other month, Halo will have to hold it's own as the most popular Multiplayer game and right now, Infinity Ward is killing with Modern Warfare 2 but that's to be expected with new games.

In order to keep a public that enjoys the game, Bungie will have to change up the chemistry of Halo to keep up their sales quota and stay in business. And as to your Pelican drivability put-down, shove a sock in it buddy! You know as well as we do that there are ways to incorporate such an awesome feature in Halo: Reach without tipping the balance. Look at ODST. We wanted to play as them since Halo 2. Guess what, Bungie made it happen. Same goes for Firefight, Assembly, Sandbox, Foundry, Heretic, and the Auto Mag (albeit it being useless on shielded Brutes). Bungie listens to the community and grants wishes. Though bots may have been a step too far.

All in all, the Halo formula will need to drastically change if it's to keep up with the competition. With a bit of a change in gameplay and it's reputation, it'll be an early Christmas/Hannukah/Kwanzaa/etc. for Bungie and for us. It really all depends on the beta in early 2010.

this is how i feel

  • 11.18.2009 11:56 AM PDT

1.Arkham Asylum, 2.Mass Effect, 3.Halo CE, 4.Mass Effect 2, 5.Halo 2, 6.Splinter Cell Double Agent, 7.Gears of War 2, 8.Medievil, 9.Oblivion, 10.Crash Team Racing

Well, to exaggerate: It's better to change everything than to change nothing with videogames. I rather play Halo: Modern Warfare Simcity Stories than: Halo Combat Evolved again.

But Halo Reach is Bungie's last game, maybe. So it's good to keep basics the same. Then again, MW2 has the same basics as MW1 has and still... look at it!

  • 11.18.2009 12:02 PM PDT

All our dreams come true, if we have the courage to pursue them.
The friend in my adversity I shall always cherish most. I can better trust those who helped to relieve the gloom of my dark hours than those who are so ready to enjoy with me the sunshine of my prosperity.

Posted by: Harlow
Davey is beyond any shadow of a doubt that red haired F-Blam!- tryhard that would always keep you from seeing the Deku Tree.


[16:45] kalriq: because you're a living legend --<3

Change is good! We voted for obama!

Oh wait...nvm I was the one guy that didn't..


>.>

  • 11.18.2009 12:06 PM PDT

Posted by: kalle90
Well, to exaggerate: It's better to change everything than to change nothing with videogames. I rather play Halo: Modern Warfare Simcity Stories than: Halo Combat Evolved again.

But Halo Reach is Bungie's last game, maybe. So it's good to keep basics the same. Then again, MW2 has the same basics as MW1 has and still... look at it!


So, what you're saying is that if you have the perfect, most delicious recipe for cookies, it's better to create a new recipe, than to simply improve on the oh-so-addictive previous one?

The basics of Halo are what make it so much fun, and so addictive that two years after it's release it's still incredibly popular.

Granted, if they copied and pasted (Yeah, I'm well aware you can't actually do that) the exact multiplayer code to the next game, it would be boring. That's why I'm saying keep the feel, keep the basics, but add bigger games, more weapons, more vehicles, more maps and new scenery.

  • 11.18.2009 12:09 PM PDT

I think there should be more weapons. Loads more.

  • 11.18.2009 12:09 PM PDT

Signatures are for squares.

I agree, OP.

Look how many class based shooters there are nowadays, Team Fortress, CoD, Vegas, Battle Field, etc.

So many class based games, and many people beg for classes in Halo. But, how many games like Halo are truely left?

How many games does everyone start even, and fight on even ground with all the stats remaining the same, and you have to fight to control the map and power weapons.

There is little to none left besides Halo.

People complain that Halo is getting boring, But it's a two year old game! When I get bored of playing Halo, I pop in Gears, CoD, or Orange Box. Why? So I can get some different gameplay. But what happens when I get sick of playing Class based games? I go back to Halo, which has nailed the classic gameplay feeling.

But what would happen if Reach was class based? What would you do when you're bored of playing class based shooters? You'd have no other options, and then gaming as a whole would start to decline and become boring overall.

People shouldn't want Reach to be class based, because it's not good for gamers as a total. If you want to play a class based game, go play the other 100 on the market, but don't mess with one of the few remaining true "Run and Gun" games left.

I don't like plaything the same type of games all the time. Why would anyone else?

-Think about it.

  • 11.18.2009 12:15 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: Hylebos
I really don't think Bungie is silly enough to mess with the multiplayer that much. If they were planning on making any drastic changes they could have done it in the previous games.
I agree with the 'Bos here.

Reach will keep the solid, "traditional" Halo core, while expanding in different ways, similar to Halo 3.

Halo 3 added equipment, and brought a lot of Halo 1 back into the mix, with added features.

I think they are going to keep that dynamic, and add more features like firefight and an improved forge and theater.

  • 11.18.2009 12:18 PM PDT

Posted by: Uncle Kulikov
Posted by: Hylebos
I really don't think Bungie is silly enough to mess with the multiplayer that much. If they were planning on making any drastic changes they could have done it in the previous games.
I agree with the 'Bos here.

Reach will keep the solid, "traditional" Halo core, while expanding in different ways, similar to Halo 3.

Halo 3 added equipment, and brought a lot of Halo 1 back into the mix, with added features.

I think they are going to keep that dynamic, and add more features like firefight and an improved forge and theater.


I certainly hope so, and I'm almost sure that they will. This post was more to discover other people's views on whether they believe that Bungie should keep the core Halo gameplay or not.

  • 11.19.2009 7:37 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2