Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: "Let Halo be Halo" I disagree. Let Halo be Great.
  • Subject: "Let Halo be Halo" I disagree. Let Halo be Great.
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: "Let Halo be Halo" I disagree. Let Halo be Great.
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: emilrulez
I like your whole idea of "let's not screw over Halo with CoD" type gameplay but if Bungie changes that then they probably won't sell as many copies (and Microsoft will have retard spree).Good day.

Microsoft could put the Halo logo on a shoebox full of crap and it would sell like hotcakes. Anything affiliated with Halo will make tons of money. Would you really not buy Halo: Reach just because you didn't think it was "traditional" enough? While we might genuinely care about the direction the Halo series takes, the 8 year old dragging his mom to gamestop does not and will buy it just because it's Halo. And there are a lot of 8 year olds on Xbox Live...

  • 11.20.2009 3:49 PM PDT

Wall-o-text.

All I'll say is this.

Halo is great, to let Halo be Halo is to Let it be great. So your argument is not valid.

  • 11.20.2009 6:44 PM PDT

The guys on the Resistance 2 forums hate Resistance 2, because it feels like a Halo and COD combo. They liked Resistance 1, and more people still play Resistance 1. Some FF fans seriously hate on 12 for being so different, despite the fact it's just the atb system without random battles with gambits. Thank you for your time. That doesn't mean Halo can't steal. I just think they should keep a traditional play-list with old-school game-play, and maybe have a separate play-list utilizing custom class based options. PDZ, albeit sucky, has a Counter-Strike mode, and a traditional mode, and all the little gametypes work within those two modes.

[Edited on 11.20.2009 7:40 PM PST]

  • 11.20.2009 7:37 PM PDT

Halo needs to be Halo, that's what makes it Halo.

I love Halo.

I've said many times before, add weapons, vehicles, equipment, but keep it simple. Do not ruin this game by following the trend of ultra-customization and un-lockables. The Halo series was the best shooter series I have ever played.

Because of a couple key things.

A. It was simple for the casual players to understand, control the map and weapons, be smart about your gameplay and you will win. Granted, this game also had a lot of inner depth which can be seen in the higher levels of game plays.

B. It's not classed based, which means I can't spawn with rockets and snipes.

  • 11.20.2009 7:44 PM PDT

Aye.

The issue isn't lifting ideas from other games, but more that all the proposed ideas aren't in keeping with Halo's existing style.

Sprinting isn't practical due to shields while classes and perks just isn't how the Halo series rolls.

We all want evolution rather than revolution; subtle changes rather than copy and pasting ideas from other games.

  • 11.20.2009 7:54 PM PDT

Posted by: AgLion
Halo is already great.

We can still stick with the 'Let Halo be Halo' thing now.
I have played thousands of matchmaking games, not to mention campaign and custom and forge. Honestly, I want to see Bungie produce something different, because I like a lot of elements of their games but I am starting to find the design stubbornly unchanged even when other studios have upped the anti.

There are some elements I don't like, and some I do. Halo: Reach should be fantastic fun, and that is paramount. I don't care if it accomplishes this by a series of amazing revolutions or by totally ripping off another game that is fantastic fun.

Let Halo be great.

  • 11.20.2009 7:59 PM PDT

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

This sums up nicely my views on the subject.

Posted by: emilrulez

Posted by: Muckknuckle
Finally, a voice of reason.


Thanks.


You're welcome, kind sir.

I must say that the entire idea of a perk seems absurd to me, especially in the most fair and balanced online FPS currently available: Halo 3. To introduce an unbalancing feature such as this would only serve to increase the skill gap between the "n00b" and the "pr0". While the skill gap is generally a good thing for all parties involved, to increase it would be to simply further the distinction between the MLG and casual players that both inhabit the Xbox Live universe.

Furthermore, the choosing of weapons simply reduces the value of said guns, and makes obsolete the entire strategy of fighting for the power weapons, which I have and always will enjoy.

A common counterargument to my previous statement is quite simply: "w311 1t t4k35 5ki11 2 unl0ck t3h Gunz". My counterpoint to this asinine counterpoint is also simple:

"It takes skill to fight over the weapons already present on a map, more so than simply playing the game for a long time (the most common method of ranking up in CoD). Furthermore, keeping with this traditional approach to multiplayer would appease the vast majority of loyal Halo fans (myself included) that have stuck with the game since its inception, and virtually guarantee the excellent sales of Reach."

I must admit that that was not as simple as it should have been, but simplicity is the weapon of the CoD loving enemy, and the only way to counter it is:

Posted by: Muckknuckle
a voice of reason.

  • 11.20.2009 8:03 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2