Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: The next Halo - how do you want it?
  • Subject: The next Halo - how do you want it?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: The next Halo - how do you want it?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I want to see the large scale battles the Human-Covenant War was known for. Missions where you aren't an invincible walking tank. More missions where you're directly assisting a UNSC assault not just off on your own beating grunts with the butt of your rifle.

Maybe introduce choices where depending how you complete a mission it'll have an effect on later mission.

  • 03.17.2011 8:32 AM PDT


Posted by: PhantomOfTOpera
Open map and non-liner objectives has been done on New Mombasa and New Alexandria, it is fine enough considering that it is an FIRST PERSON SHOOTER and not some RPG games, so ditch the side quests and farming in favor of more fast paced action and intense gameplay.


There's a big difference between RPGs and shooters, and none of the changes or those orphan talked of bears any similarities to RPG elements. But considering how much developers doesn't risk anything nowadays, and how they keep rehashing the same things, such comment isn't surprising. I love the original Halo gameplay like everyone else, but can you guys seriously continue to buy the games and have fun after a 10th almost identical entry? I can't. As I've stopped playing CoD games for some time, or barely play any modern FPSes for that matter.

I never talked about side quests either. Giving you freedom during missions =/= adding RPG elements, it only means adding more freedom, more choice to get to objectives, more replay value, more fun. Just look at all the Far Cry games, are you telling me they got away from good FPS gameplay into RPG territory? You can do assignments, buy weapons, choose between a big variety of them, etc. But even if you could consider them side-quests, the game felt NOTHING like an RPG, only pure sandbox shooting.

You could throw cocktail molotovs or use your flame thrower to burn grass, trees and bushes, the wind spreading the fire to your enemies or around them, making propane tanks explode in the process. You could fight your way Rambo style. You could use a sniper and pick up enemies at a distance, then come closer and silently kill enemies by behind or with a suppressed pistol. You could ram enemies with your jeep and use the turret to kill everyone. You could come by boat behind the base. You could use a glider to get somewhere hard to reach for a surprise attack. The possibilities were endless. I'm not saying Halo should play like Far Cry 2, but that freedom =/= RPGs nor not fast paced frantic action. But then, it's you who decides whether or not to turn the action fast paced, personally, I prefer not. At least, not the whole time as I love the occasional big, epic fights. But to me, freedom only makes for more exciting, dynamic and realistic gameplay.

And then, you don't necessarily need to give that much freedom, only decent objectives and level design would be good enough to me. Give us levels which have a sense of purpose, make us go back and forth to do objectives and try to turn the tide of the battle, always going forward can sometimes work against the game, variety is key, which is something Bungie seemed to forget at some point, and kept throwing at us the very same vehicle portions, semi-open areas and corridors. orphan gave very good ideas of great objectives that actually have purpose and are more fun than hitting a bunch of switches.


Campaign length is DEFINITLY an issue and the Halo 2 campaign was long enough, but individual levels could be more dynamic like Reach, and definitely more waypoints so as not to get lost in the Library (arrows on the FLOOR please, or a tactical map for you to plan the route (like ODST). That is what Cortana is meant for in the first place. And by length I mean the number of missions, NOT the length of levels (Gravemind or Assault on the CR gave me nightmares considering I cant play for more than a few hours at a go due to time constrains).

Neither Gravemind of Assault on the Control Room last a few hours. Halo 2 missions were basically half ones, but I think one of Halo's biggest problem since Halo 3 (though 2 of these were long enough in that matter) is how brief the missions were. In Reach, the pacing felt all over the place and it was hard to successfully be drawn in the game since the moment you felt immersed, you were somehow taken by the hand to do something completely different, or just continue through a very unsteady path which reminded more of movies than video games.


Carrying items should not, in my opinion, be integrated into the game. Once again it bears doing to the difference between First Person Shooter and Shooter-RPG like fallout.

What has this to do with RPGs? Shooters can't be RPGs unless there are level-ups and actual quests. Splinter Cell Chaos Theory and Double Agent did plenty of things different for the genre, and that only helped in making a fresh and different experience. In Chaos Theory you could fail some objectives, or decide not to do them, but that impacted you objectives in the next mission. Even in one mission, there were several ways or paths to do one objective. Double Agent had you making choices to keep the trust of the terrorists you were working for. There were missions in which you were just walking around the headquarters, looking for fingerprints, documents and such. Both games were far from being close to the RPG genre, both games played the same as the ones which came before, except it granted more gameplay freedom which only helped make better games - okay, that is debatable about DA, but that's not because of those things I talked of.

One thing I would like to see is an Elite or Covenant campaign, like halo 2. That would be AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think Bungie dropped the ball for that matter in Halo 3. Maybe an Arbiter campaign wasn't necessary, but he being an important character was necessary. Come on, you played half of Halo 2 with him, saw plenty of cinematics and all with him, they just couldn't throw him in the backseat, and give him a line or two to remind you he's there. I thought it was very weak from their part.

  • 03.17.2011 8:37 AM PDT


Posted by: Nameless Oracle
I want to see the large scale battles the Human-Covenant War was known for. Missions where you aren't an invincible walking tank. More missions where you're directly assisting a UNSC assault not just off on your own beating grunts with the butt of your rifle.

Maybe introduce choices where depending how you complete a mission it'll have an effect on later mission.



Personally, I'm not sure about choices that affects later missions in Halo games. But choices within missions that actually affects how you go through them and do objectives? I'd welcome this with open arms.

  • 03.17.2011 8:39 AM PDT


Posted by: Nameless Oracle
I want to see the large scale battles the Human-Covenant War was known for. Missions where you aren't an invincible walking tank. More missions where you're directly assisting a UNSC assault not just off on your own beating grunts with the butt of your rifle.

Maybe introduce choices where depending how you complete a mission it'll have an effect on later mission.

I'd like a human and a covenant campaign. There would be 4 campaigns. The human one would be sequel to halo 4, and another one in which you play as an ODST on harvest in large-scale battles.

The covenant one would be you playing as The Arbiter, and the other one in which you would play as a hunter.(Bond brother dies in the end)

I'd like a complete firefight, custom, and mission map editor.

Firefight, humanfight, floodfight.

Perfect theater.

For MM, you could play as all of the covenant species, and all all of the flood forms, and all types of humans. All vehicles ever thought up and armour that effects gameplay (-speed +armour if you wear big chest piece, etc). And with 100 vs 100 battles, with commanders and al of that.

  • 03.17.2011 8:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag: tsassi
  • user homepage:

Deep fried and wrapped in bacon.

Someone just had to say that. Seriously speaking, story wise I would like it to be a direct Halo 3 sequel. Gameplay wise I would like it to be as competitve as Halo CE. If that isn't possible, then at least as competitve as Halo 3. What I don't want the gameplay to be is something like Reach or worse.

Content wise I want it to improve on every aspect from Halo Reach. Halo 3 and Reach had Forge which was just an object placement tool. What about a real map editor where you can change the terrain, add weather and time of day effects, change textures of objects and have thousands of different objects.

Theater would probably be pretty much the same, except with party watching and you wouldn't have to wait for the film to load. You could just skip to any part of the film without having to wait.

Firefight would also have a map editor or if that isn't possible at least a Forge. Custom Firefight options would of course be better and there would be more AI in each wave.

Armory would of course have huge amounts of customization options and armor parts. We should finally get an accurate color wheel where you can get any hue of any color. Multiple color layers also of course. But not full emblemb customization. I don't want to see rude emblembs everywhere.

It would also have custom game search feature. That is an absolute must. We have been wanting it for ages. It should finally come.

That's what I want the next Halo game to be.

  • 03.17.2011 9:05 AM PDT



Posted by: gamedude234
While CE had the best campaign, it had by far the worst level design, as the last 3 levels were all backtracking previous levels, fortunately the flood spiced things up so
that it wasn't too repetitive, but it was too familiar. Halo 2 was the most linear of all, as was Halo 3(though both had good campaigns). ODST brought back the huge open worlds, and Reach brought it to a whole new level. I don't see how the level design is bad and linear when it has the biggest levels in the Halo franchise.


Personally, I loved the backtracking missions for several reasons. First, it helps give purpose to the places you've been. The Halo control room, the Pillar of Autumn are important places, and returning to them only helps giving the campaign more structure, coherence and meaning. Plus, they all play very differently and features different areas than the original missions. In Two Betrayals, you don't even do real backtracking, ignoring plenty of areas you've been through. Instead of being a UNSC assault on the Covenant, you desperately need to stop 343 destroying pulse generators at night against covenant, flood and sentinels. It feels, it plays very differently.

I love taking time in each environment, because it makes the game more immersive, rather than taking you from one place to another all the time. In that regard, I think Bungie did well into making a coherent level that had purpose in Reach with ONI Sword Base. Although it was a bit small, and the ONI base itself was teasingly short.

ODST had "open worlds" but has much as the design itself wasn't that bad, the real missions were as formulatic as ever. I don't see how Reach has the biggest levels of the Halo franchise, it certainly has the shortests if you ignore ODST.

Winter Contingency is short and only teases of open level design, kind of a mini-tease of the Halo mission in the original game; shorter, less open. ONI Swordbase albeit being good, was quite small. Nightfall was medium and very linear, Tip of the Spear was also medium and very linear with a succession of corridors and semi-open spaces. Long Night of Solace has one of the briefest, most short sections of the whole Halo franchise with the beach attack up to the sabre. The space combat spices things up, but it's basically the same thing as on ground fighting; take shields off, then headshot, hide after taking some shots. Rinse and repeat. The ship part albeit very short, was actually well made, but a short portion of the whole game. Take off the space section, and the mission is by far the shortest.

Exodus, has one small section that actually plays differently, but again, only a tease, the level design not giving justice to the jetpack, they didn't do much more than tried incorporating it for exciting gameplay and level design. The mission itself isn't that big compared to past Halo games, certainly not Halo CE. I've been through every Reach mission more than once, and it has only been more evident to me how they can be short. New Alexandria is the most unique Reach mission, but again, I feel they could've done more. The moment you got inside a building, there was nothing special at all. Instead of linking those places by a walk-able, corridor area, you do so by flying. And in which case, that type of level design was already done in Halo 2 in a more exciting way. The Package? Nothing special. Pillar of Autumn is probably the worst offender is you forget the Boneyard part, which wasn't impressive enough.

Halo 2 was the most linear game, but among being only the second entry, the level design itself was good enough for me to not be too irritated. Halo 3, ODST and Reach on the other hand, offers little less than a bit less linearity. While Halo 2 is my favourite campaign after CE, I must admit the level design is overall better Halo 3 and Reach. But still, would you seriously keep buying Halo games if the only thing they did is rehashing the very same gameplay and type of level design, only slightly better overall? I would not. Reach's level design to me was far too all over the place and only showing potential, while seemingly showing how the Halo engine didn't age well at all (graphics are the last thing I'm talking about). Reach feels like Bungie tried little new things just for the sake of it so people wouldn't say they released the same game as Halo 3. Hell, they didn't even bother giving the scarab a decent appearance, while Halo 3 did so successfully and differently THREE times.

  • 03.17.2011 9:07 AM PDT

8'6"+ Elites again. Period.

  • 03.17.2011 9:35 AM PDT


Posted by: Evil Johnny


Posted by: gamedude234
While CE had the best campaign, it had by far the worst level design, as the last 3 levels were all backtracking previous levels, fortunately the flood spiced things up so
that it wasn't too repetitive, but it was too familiar. Halo 2 was the most linear of all, as was Halo 3(though both had good campaigns). ODST brought back the huge open worlds, and Reach brought it to a whole new level. I don't see how the level design is bad and linear when it has the biggest levels in the Halo franchise.


Personally, I loved the backtracking missions for several reasons. First, it helps give purpose to the places you've been. The Halo control room, the Pillar of Autumn are important places, and returning to them only helps giving the campaign more structure, coherence and meaning. Plus, they all play very differently and features different areas than the original missions. In Two Betrayals, you don't even do real backtracking, ignoring plenty of areas you've been through. Instead of being a UNSC assault on the Covenant, you desperately need to stop 343 destroying pulse generators at night against covenant, flood and sentinels. It feels, it plays very differently.

I love taking time in each environment, because it makes the game more immersive, rather than taking you from one place to another all the time. In that regard, I think Bungie did well into making a coherent level that had purpose in Reach with ONI Sword Base. Although it was a bit small, and the ONI base itself was teasingly short.

ODST had "open worlds" but has much as the design itself wasn't that bad, the real missions were as formulatic as ever. I don't see how Reach has the biggest levels of the Halo franchise, it certainly has the shortests if you ignore ODST.

Winter Contingency is short and only teases of open level design, kind of a mini-tease of the Halo mission in the original game; shorter, less open. ONI Swordbase albeit being good, was quite small. Nightfall was medium and very linear, Tip of the Spear was also medium and very linear with a succession of corridors and semi-open spaces. Long Night of Solace has one of the briefest, most short sections of the whole Halo franchise with the beach attack up to the sabre. The space combat spices things up, but it's basically the same thing as on ground fighting; take shields off, then headshot, hide after taking some shots. Rinse and repeat. The ship part albeit very short, was actually well made, but a short portion of the whole game. Take off the space section, and the mission is by far the shortest.

Exodus, has one small section that actually plays differently, but again, only a tease, the level design not giving justice to the jetpack, they didn't do much more than tried incorporating it for exciting gameplay and level design. The mission itself isn't that big compared to past Halo games, certainly not Halo CE. I've been through every Reach mission more than once, and it has only been more evident to me how they can be short. New Alexandria is the most unique Reach mission, but again, I feel they could've done more. The moment you got inside a building, there was nothing special at all. Instead of linking those places by a walk-able, corridor area, you do so by flying. And in which case, that type of level design was already done in Halo 2 in a more exciting way. The Package? Nothing special. Pillar of Autumn is probably the worst offender is you forget the Boneyard part, which wasn't impressive enough.

Halo 2 was the most linear game, but among being only the second entry, the level design itself was good enough for me to not be too irritated. Halo 3, ODST and Reach on the other hand, offers little less than a bit less linearity. While Halo 2 is my favourite campaign after CE, I must admit the level design is overall better Halo 3 and Reach. But still, would you seriously keep buying Halo games if the only thing they did is rehashing the very same gameplay and type of level design, only slightly better overall? I would not. Reach's level design to me was far too all over the place and only showing potential, while seemingly showing how the Halo engine didn't age well at all (graphics are the last thing I'm talking about). Reach feels like Bungie tried little new things just for the sake of it so people wouldn't say they released the same game as Halo 3. Hell, they didn't even bother giving the scarab a decent appearance, while Halo 3 did so successfully and differently THREE times.

I agree on the CE backtracking, and how it was well done. However, there is no denying that:

2 betrayals is assault on the control room backwards. Yes, you skip some parts, but 90% of the indoor fights were identical to AOTCR, save for the flood and sentinels, granted, it had a bigger emphasis on banshee gameplay.

Keyes, save for the first part, is Truth and reconciliation(the same Exact thing), again, save for the fact that you're alone and that there's the flood.

The Maw is, again Pillar of Autumn, except for the part when you need to destroy the reactors, and the warthog run. Again, Flood and sentinels.
They could have made new areas i think, for example, place Keyes somewhere else apart from the control room.

Now, I do more or less agree on your Reach campaign observations. BUT:

Winter Contingency has multiple ways to approach the enemy, and it actually has multiple ways to progress, for example when you're on the car, also, the Spirits actually appear in different locations as you play, making each time different. It is though, a short mission.

ONI also had multiple ways to progress. Which AA guns to activate first? Warthog or highjack a Ghost, or even a Wraith? Go on the left or right ramps at the beginning, or straight on in? Then, after all that outdoor shooting, it brings you inside for some close quarters combat, to add variety. It was a medium length level I would say. It does also have fantastic skyboxes though.

Nightfall was designed to bring back memories from Truth and reconciliation, which it unfortunately failed at doing. T&R had marines, and it felt like a true assault. However, Nightfall has a more unique feel to it. I believe it has the only Active cam in the campaign, and couple with the sniper, make for some intense sleuth experiences. It is quite linear though, but there are still multiple ways to approach a fight at some points. Around Medium length.

Tip of the Spear was....odd. Its introduced as a huge battle, but in the end is actually a "destroy AA guns with your warthog" which is OK, but you shouldn't introduce a level as something, then have it as something else. Also, we already did some warthog combat in ONI swordbase. I think TOTS would have been perfect for a scorpion. All in All an enjoyable level.

Long Night of Solace is actually the Longest Level in Reach, and I would say its 5th in series after Attack On the Control room, The Covenant(halo 3), Gravemind(Halo 2) and The Ark(Halo 3). The beach assault was fun, but it should have been extended, i agree with you on that, same with Space Combat, though Low-Gee, Interior combat, coupled with Space and Open combat, makes it one of the most varied level in any halo game.

Exodus would have been a great level if the Brutes had berserk. If the had that one thing, Exodus would have been a great level. but alas, no. It did give that feeling of losing the war and of hopelessness. It also had varied combat throughout the level.

New Alexandria was also a huge, varied nonlinear level. Its the level that puts the most focus on air combat since, well, The Oracle, and even then it was short. Yes, the indoor combat is a bit stale, though it does provide something different, On the bridge thing you suggested? IMO, thats a horrible idea that would have killed the level. Its also packed with easter eggs, which are always fun. However, this would have been a perfect opportunity to finally drive a pelican legibly, but unfortunately, no.

The Package was an ok mission. Since a lot is backtracking, didn't really like the beginning, though the defend Halsey's lad was really fun, that was it. The Scorpion was finally introduced.

Pillar of Autumn was great from the boneyard part and onwards. The boneyard part was when i really felt like it was a losing battle and it had lots of AI on screen at once, and not 1 framerate drop. You could approach the conflict in different ways, and the Marines were actually kinda helpful:O.

Lone wolf is Epic. FACT=P

Final conclusion: To me all pro-Reach campaigns had mostly great levels, but then 2-3 horrible ones. While Reach maintains an average between ZOMG EPIC! and downright horrible and frustrating. So to me, all Halo campaigns are good in their own ways.

Whew, that took a while. Its just that i never understand the absurd amount of hate Reach gets around here.

  • 03.17.2011 10:58 AM PDT

i dont want it, ever play call of duty? they use to be good but now there all the same with different campaigns.

  • 03.17.2011 10:59 AM PDT

Join Me for all things Forge: Reaching for Forge


Posted by: Nameless Oracle

Maybe introduce choices where depending how you complete a mission it'll have an effect on later mission.



Like Mass Effect-ish? I've never played them, but I've heard you can choose certain things...

  • 03.17.2011 1:02 PM PDT

How about something like this?
- Chief returns
- Goes to save Halsey from the micro sphere from the remnants of the Covenant.
-Cortana goes rampant.
- The Arbiter returns to help.

  • 03.17.2011 2:04 PM PDT


Posted by: gamedude234
I agree on the CE backtracking, and how it was well done. However, there is no denying that:

2 betrayals is assault on the control room backwards. Yes, you skip some parts, but 90% of the indoor fights were identical to AOTCR, save for the flood and sentinels, granted, it had a bigger emphasis on banshee gameplay.

Keyes, save for the first part, is Truth and reconciliation(the same Exact thing), again, save for the fact that you're alone and that there's the flood.

The Maw is, again Pillar of Autumn, except for the part when you need to destroy the reactors, and the warthog run. Again, Flood and sentinels.
They could have made new areas i think, for example, place Keyes somewhere else apart from the control room.


Well, backtracking is the least of things that bother me really. But even if Keyes had the same environment as T&R, I didn't feel the part below the ship was the same as that mission. Plus, The Package was basically ONI: Sword Base with two additional areas. Not that it really bothered me either.


Winter Contingency has multiple ways to approach the enemy, and it actually has multiple ways to progress, for example when you're on the car, also, the Spirits actually appear in different locations as you play, making each time different. It is though, a short mission.

That's why I said it was like the Halo mission with CE :P. But while Halo had 3 areas you needed to reach to get to marines and defend them until extraction, Reach's place to defend are far from as fun to defend and well made, it is also very brief.

ONI also had multiple ways to progress. Which AA guns to activate first? Warthog or highjack a Ghost, or even a Wraith? Go on the left or right ramps at the beginning, or straight on in? Then, after all that outdoor shooting, it brings you inside for some close quarters combat, to add variety. It was a medium length level I would say. It does also have fantastic skyboxes though.

Personally, giving you the choice between the order of two objectives you need to do anyway is a cheap way to give you choice. If there was an order, it would have barely changed anything. It was left or right, two linear paths which you needed to take both anyway. It's not like it was a sandbox design where you could do both objectives in different order without necessarily taking the same paths the whole time. Just offering different paths to the same objective is less cheap IMO. But that's a problem I see with most shooters, either they have always very linear levels, or else they come up with something that barely changes anything for the sake of it. I never encountered something as different ways (not paths) to do an objective, as just one example.

As for the mission being varied, yes, but I think it works at its disadvantage in a way, or to the game's disadvantage. You're always doing something different, always somewhere else, it feels like you run through the whole thing, even if you don't. That's one thing I loved in Halo CE and 2 over the other games (except for The Ark and Covenant missions), that you actually felt like doing that mission, you feel immersed because you feel progressing at a decent pace. Reach's pace particularly feels all over the place, too disjointed and inconsistent. Just look at Nightfall or Exodus, it is of the same length as Sword Base and Long Night of Solace, but has a much more appropriate pacing. And it also has to do with the mission transitions.

Nightfall was designed to bring back memories from Truth and reconciliation, which it unfortunately failed at doing. T&R had marines, and it felt like a true assault. However, Nightfall has a more unique feel to it. I believe it has the only Active cam in the campaign, and couple with the sniper, make for some intense sleuth experiences. It is quite linear though, but there are still multiple ways to approach a fight at some points. Around Medium length.

I liked Nightfall as an Halo mission. But its problem was as a fifth Halo game mission, it shows Bungie as playing very, very safe. A word I'd use for the whole game, one which can explain why everything they try feels so much like a bitter tease than anything else.


Tip of the Spear was....odd. Its introduced as a huge battle, but in the end is actually a "destroy AA guns with your warthog" which is OK, but you shouldn't introduce a level as something, then have it as something else. Also, we already did some warthog combat in ONI swordbase. I think TOTS would have been perfect for a scorpion. All in All an enjoyable level.

Again, it was a fun Halo level - as every level in Reach - but fell a bit short for me as a Reach one. It felt as a mini-Ark mission in a way. The vehicle combat parts needed much bigger environments. In fact, The Ark had much bigger spaces for vehicle combat, as The Covenant also, Assault on the Control Room, Halo, and some Halo 2 missions.

The last bit on the Spire map feels too contrived compared to what it could have been. For example, I think there should have been a big area with several Spires, several ways to get up them, several ways to bring them down (explosions, switches), and the fact that their shield are down affecting gameplay. Maybe aerial support, maybe you also needed to bring down other AA guns or anti-air wraiths. Maybe you could request a falcon to bring them down by air, or something else. You should have felt like taking part of a big military operation, and being on Reach, the UNSC fortress and being a Spartan, you should have been given more freedom on how to approach your objectives, requesting vehicles, instead of being forced a falcon segment for example. Maybe you could also come in from a falcon, and tell the pilot where you want to be inserted. Asking for a lift and get somewhere else again.

Long Night of Solace is actually the Longest Level in Reach, and I would say its 5th in series after Attack On the Control room, The Covenant(halo 3), Gravemind(Halo 2) and The Ark(Halo 3). The beach assault was fun, but it should have been extended, i agree with you on that, same with Space Combat, though Low-Gee, Interior combat, coupled with Space and Open combat, makes it one of the most varied level in any halo game.

The Corvette part was quite good, although again, I feel it is contrived to what it could've been. Longer Low-Gee combat, with more effect on the gameplay. I felt the rest was a bit short too, but yeah, probably one of the best parts of the campaign.


New Alexandria was also a huge, varied nonlinear level. Its the level that puts the most focus on air combat since, well, The Oracle, and even then it was short. Yes, the indoor combat is a bit stale, though it does provide something different, On the bridge thing you suggested? IMO, thats a horrible idea that would have killed the level. Its also packed with easter eggs, which are always fun. However, this would have been a perfect opportunity to finally drive a pelican legibly, but unfortunately, no.

I think you misread, I wasn't suggesting anything, just saying the level design didn't feel that special to me despite the air combat, that it felt like disjointed mission parts. But anyway, it was well done as a whole. But I was disappointed - as in ODST - that there wasn't much skycraper action. Shooting your way on roofs, walking bridges, etc. Using the fact that you are fighting in tall buildings to bring more excitement, rather than just landing somewhere and getting inside a building with gameplay not much more different.


Whew, that took a while. Its just that i never understand the absurd amount of hate Reach gets around here.

One part of the reason I was so disappointed in Reach was the story itself and how it messed up the lore, but that's irrelevant to an Halo 4. Otherwise, it's because I felt Bungie played it way too safe, only tried to polish an Halo experience we have been playing for 9 years instead of trying anything new. It didn't bother me that much in Halo 3 mainly because it was the final chapter of the trilogy. The scarab fights were also a definitive step up, scaling things up in a satisfying manner. Though it was a limited step up since it only affected a couple of encounters.

While the city in ODST was a good thing, I though it missed interiors making it feel like several Halo missions put together. And the missions themselves were nothing but a succession of encounters copied from another Halo game. Reach while trying a few new things (space combat, jetpack platforming, the falcon part), didn't really scaled up the ante on any encounter. The on ground encounters were in fact a step down from Halo 3 most of the time. There wasn't even a single scarab fight, and the tank segment was very small, as like I said, the Tip of the Spear mission felt like a baby The Ark.

So yes I was disappointed in Reach, but then it brings me concern to the next Halo game. Will it be like Reach? Trying to polish the same Halo experience once again only with new weapons and vehicles and even more formulatic? I can't see myself buying the same games again over and over again but only repackaged with a slight technological upgrade. Another concern is how much CoD continues to sell. Black Ops is the SIXTH instalment and made only minimal changes from game to game.

  • 03.17.2011 2:14 PM PDT


Posted by: RockYou304

Posted by: Nameless Oracle

Maybe introduce choices where depending how you complete a mission it'll have an effect on later mission.



Like Mass Effect-ish? I've never played them, but I've heard you can choose certain things...


They don't do much. Plenty of e-mails, maybe an NPC or two you can have a small conversation with, or slightly different dialogues at one place or two.



Posted by: carls murder
i dont want it, ever play call of duty? they use to be good but now there all the same with different campaigns.


That's why I started this thread! To talk about how we would like the next Halo game to be. The last thing I want is 343 continuing to reiterate the very same experience again and again like Activision does with Call of Duty.

  • 03.17.2011 2:17 PM PDT

Lookin' handsome, OP. Hahaha.

I can't expect too much from Halo because of its arcade style origins and there'd be a lot of people out there who'd complain about any gameplay changes (ODST for example or even Reach. "I can't jump as high! I'm not as invincible! Bungie! Bungie! Make it all better! Waaaahh!") so I think the highly linear gameplay is there to stay.

I loved Reach. Sure there were some dissapointment as far as canon and characters went, but I loved the storyline as well as playing N6. Also, working in a TEAM was a blammin' godsend.

  • 03.17.2011 3:07 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I agree with everything you said about each level in Reach... they all had potential but in the end they didn't live up to that potential... none of them did. Long Night of Solace is the only level I was actually satisfied with because of the variety and I loved the space battle.
But I don't think that Halo4 should change the actual gameplay dynamics at all. I think it should play exactly like the last games but just with more features (armor abilites 2.0).
It's the level design that Bungie are screwing up. With all the -blam!- they were saying about Reach and how it was inspired by CE I was expecting the most epic levels ever, the levels we got weren't mind blowing at all, they all felt cramped and linear and they didn't feel like the next step up from ODST... I mean they felt like they could've just been another expantion of Halo3, as in it was just like an ODST 2 if you know what I mean.
The platform Jetpack section on Exodus was a piece of -blam!-, you weren't even killing enemies you were just using it to cross about 4 platforms to get to the other side... wasted potential right there.
The 'on rail' or whatever its called falcon section on Tip of the Spear was -blam!-... it lasted like 30 seconds long and it just felt dull.
And WTF was up with the scorpion sequence?? Is The Package the best they could think of? Before the game came out I thought there was going to be the biggest tank war 20x bigger than The Ark.
I think Halo 4 just needs better levels that feel huge that make you actually WANT to explore around. It needs epic vehicle wars that can send a slight tingle to your private area, epic skyboxes with crazy -blam!- going on in the background (Bungie are pretty good at this but Reach felt lacking). I was planning to go more in depth with this post but my brain is just fuzzing out right now.

  • 03.17.2011 6:26 PM PDT


Posted by: noble6sfriend
But I don't think that Halo4 should change the actual gameplay dynamics at all. I think it should play exactly like the last games but just with more features (armor abilites 2.0).
It's the level design that Bungie are screwing up.


Well, I wouldn't see a change of gameplay necessary (although welcomed for me), a change of level design alone could make a massive difference.



I think Halo 4 just needs better levels that feel huge that make you actually WANT to explore around.


Yeah, and you need to be able to explore. In Reach, there was absolutely nothing to explore.

It needs epic vehicle wars that can send a slight tingle to your private area

What is weird, is that in this department, Reach got significantly worse than Halo 3. Just all 3 scarab fights were miles above any vehicle combat in the game, let's not even talk about how the actual "normal" fights were better too. In fact, as far as vehicular combat goes, Reach is the worst of the whole series.

[Edited on 03.17.2011 7:33 PM PDT]

  • 03.17.2011 7:31 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Yeah it's like Bungie actually wanted to downgrade the vehicle epicness. It's the same with MP too IMO... they need a slap. I think The Ark is the best vehicle level so far

  • 03.17.2011 7:39 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I don't want another Halo. Bungie has done a good job. Five games is definitely more than enough. I am satisified. If they remake older games, I am fine with that, but I don't really care much for them making new ones.

  • 03.17.2011 8:45 PM PDT


Posted by: Sierra 1993DJC
I don't want another Halo. Bungie has done a good job. Five games is definitely more than enough. I am satisified. If they remake older games, I am fine with that, but I don't really care much for them making new ones.


I wonder if you would be thinking the same thing if Bungie actually didn't rehash the same exact experience. That's why I want the next Halo to be different, or at least feature vastly superior level design that makes feel the other games different while the core gameplay remains the same - though I'd prefer some changes in gameplay, they don't have to be anything major - because otherwise, as you, I dn't see the interest in new Halo games.

  • 03.20.2011 9:38 AM PDT

Error 404:
-Error not found.

Same, much?

  • 03.20.2011 9:47 AM PDT

"You can't touch music, but music can touch you."

I want a new trilogy involving Master Chief on a new world with new enemies. I want less linear gameplay (like the OP said). I'm also hoping that chief is a little less invincible too.

  • 03.20.2011 11:26 AM PDT


Posted by: Cowgoesmoo
Same, much?


Not at all. First, the search bar sucks as we all know it, it pretty much only searches for old topics. That, and I didn't see your thread when I created mine. Also, if you actually read the thread, you'd know we don't talk about the same things, or not much. My thread is solely about campaign, while in yours it's only one small part, and again, we don't exactly speak of the same things. I don't talk about the story and other things like that, but principally about level design and the core gameplay, elements which are only a very small part of your thread. I don't think our topics are mutually exclusive, on the contrary, they complement each other as we really don't discuss about the same things at all.

[Edited on 03.20.2011 1:16 PM PDT]

  • 03.20.2011 12:50 PM PDT

I want to pilot an ODST drop pod.

  • 03.20.2011 12:53 PM PDT

i'd like to see some sequel to H3 but after that i'd like to see a game based off spartan deployments during the insurrection/early covenant war as i understand it in the early part of the covy war we were winning some this could help the fact that in most previous games you feel like your ultimatly losing like reach and odst

  • 03.20.2011 5:59 PM PDT


Posted by: ShadowOp1
I would like one that would be you as a brute undercover for the UNSC and will be the one of the top aliens of the covenant and whenever something comes along he tells the UNSC and they counter their attack. Towards the end he gets caught and when he is about to be executed, the UNSC storm the place and save him.


The ending there was SOOO predictable. I want something unpredictable. Something where you know whats gonna happen, then BAM! your teamate has a heartattack and your left alone surrounded by Covies. Or you have to board a Corvette and single handedly take it down then find a way to get off un-scaved.

  • 03.20.2011 6:38 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3