Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: The direction halo is going.
  • Subject: The direction halo is going.
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: The direction halo is going.

Signatures are for squares.

Sure is over-reacting.

Look at what Halo got when it tried to be diverse. ODST didn't get great reviews, half of the fans didn't like it, and the game didn't sell as well as Halo 3.

Now look at Halo: Reach, that's just self explanatory. The characters were dull and boring. There's nothing to "analyze" about them. The story is arguably the worst of the Halo games.

Halo Wars had some okay characters, but the gameplay wasn't suited for character development. Can't really comment much here.


But the simple fact is that Master Chief IS Iconic for Halo. A Halo game without the chief is like a Legend of Zelda game without Link. The only difference is, we actually see Chiefs personality in the novels. Where as link hardly has any backstory.

Chief was always meant to be the hero of the original trilogy. Bungie expanded out and the quality just wasn't as consistent as it was with the Chief. It's only natural Microsoft wants to go back to their "mascot."

Also, you're jumping the gun quite a bit. You sound as if they came out and said, "WE'LL NEVER MAKE A HALO GAME WITHOUT THE CHIEF AGAIN."

  • 07.13.2011 11:06 AM PDT

@accordingto343

Your one stop shop for all of 343's fabulous errors and ridiculous notions in the Halo lore.

Look at what Halo got when it tried to be diverse. ODST didn't get great reviews, half of the fans didn't like it, and the game didn't sell as well as Halo 3.

Bad reviews? Didn't realize getting an average of A and B, 4/5, 5/5 and similar reviews were terrible. Can't comment on the fans desires since that's a personal issue. And oh no, it didn't outsell Halo 3 considering it didn't have half the hype and marketing Halo 3 had. So unexpected.

Now look at Halo: Reach, that's just self explanatory. The characters were dull and boring. There's nothing to "analyze" about them. The story is arguably the worst of the Halo games.

Not going to bother.

Halo Wars had some okay characters, but the gameplay wasn't suited for character development. Can't really comment much here.

Can't really argue against that, but it was still a cool game.

  • 07.13.2011 11:10 AM PDT

ODST got poor reviews and half the fans didn't like it because they approached the game as something it was not, and did not research it at all.

Reach... that's your opinion. I found Noble Team more interesting then the Chief TBH.

  • 07.13.2011 11:13 AM PDT

ODST did quite well with reviews. I think people enjoyed the game, but were angered 'cause of the price. They don't think it was deserving of its price tag.

[Edited on 07.13.2011 11:57 AM PDT]

  • 07.13.2011 11:56 AM PDT

Cave Johnson here, we're done!

PS: If you are reading this comment while imagining my voice, don't panic. That's just a side effect of the testing.


Posted by: privet caboose
Halo Wars had some okay characters, but the gameplay wasn't suited for character development. Can't really comment much here.


I didn't like the halo wars characters at all, hell I can't even remember their names aside from Forge simply because of the association of the editing tool from halo 3 and reach.

*One halopedia glance later

Professor Anders was just some scientist who was pretty much kidnapped by either ONI or the UNSC to do some work for them (This I learned from the short graphic novel that came with the limited edition, not halopedia). All the while whining her way and doing things that seemed particularly random and nonsensical. She didn't really play any role that forge didn't already cover A) being foolhardy and B) being stubborn.

Captain Cutter was just another captain who spouted orders and pondered things away from any ground warfare atop his comforting little perch where he barely ever has to face any danger.

I liked the reach characters ten times more than the halo wars, and yes while your point about the gameplay denying some aspect of those character's personalities stands true, it doesn't account for the terrible cutscenes that were all just floppy voice acting with massive amounts of overdone graphics with flashy things flying around. Halo wars has some of the least enjoyable characters overall, reach doesn't even compare to the lack of interest shown from halo wars(At least to me it appears that way, you probably feel differently).


But the simple fact is that Master Chief IS Iconic for Halo. A Halo game without the chief is like a Legend of Zelda game without Link. The only difference is, we actually see Chiefs personality in the novels. Where as link hardly has any backstory.

Chief was always meant to be the hero of the original trilogy. Bungie expanded out and the quality just wasn't as consistent as it was with the Chief. It's only natural Microsoft wants to go back to their "mascot."

Also, you're jumping the gun quite a bit. You sound as if they came out and said, "WE'LL NEVER MAKE A HALO GAME WITHOUT THE CHIEF AGAIN."



Yes chief is the iconic halo character, but not every single series needs to include that single character.

And about giving 343 a chance, I would love to give them one. But the step they are taking is far too big. This is another trilogy here, if they fail as a game company (If they even are capable of this, they might have to break and hand over the project to another company) to make the first installement of the second trilogy they could lose out on the rest of the series.

I just wish they had taken a shorter step, and instead follow up after Karen's series and continue with that story as a first step. To prove that they had the ability to not only hold their own as a game company, but to be able to hold a candle to the original series.

This isn't the time to go all out, without the steady hand that has been holding the lantern that is halo (What's with the light analogies today?) microsoft may be taking the wrong path to keeping halo as a great game under the public's eye. I'm not saying 343 is terrible and they will not succeed, just that why test them with one of the more important story lines to halo? It's like taking an indie game company and asking them to make a AAA title.

  • 07.13.2011 11:57 AM PDT

Impossible isn't a fact its an opinion

In my opinion, 343 shouldnt continue the Halo story, Halo 3 ended it nicely, sure theres the little thing whats going to happen to chief and cortana but thats what make it great. It left you wondering. I probably like most of you at the time wanted a sequel. But i think it will ruen Halo, Bungie has done a fantastic job story wise and gameplay wise..

To put it short im NOT looking forward to seeing what 343 & microsoft do with Halo games, they should stick to novels...

  • 07.13.2011 12:07 PM PDT

Well, I agree with Spencer.

The ODSTs were good enough but weren't as vital as Master Chief, nor could they do the same things.

And all you need to do is look at the Reach Spartans to see how badly playing as another Spartan can go.

We haven't played as the Chief in four years; it'll be five by the time Halo 4 comes out.

I think he deserves another few rounds. And I can't wait.

  • 07.13.2011 12:14 PM PDT

It's like taking an indie game company and asking them to make a AAA title.Well, now that's an exaggeration.

343 is comprised of highly talented guys that love the franchise (and I mean love), and have also worked on big projects prior to working on Halo 4. Some, as you know, worked for Bungie previously. 343 understands Halo, appreciates Halo, and is very passionate about it. They know what they're doing. Already, they're showing great promise, and I'm 100% behind them.

  • 07.13.2011 12:19 PM PDT


Posted by: NAStheMagiking
It's like taking an indie game company and asking them to make a AAA title.Well, now that's an exaggeration.

343 is comprised of highly talented guys that love the franchise (and I mean love), and have also worked on big projects prior to working on Halo 4. Some, as you know, worked for Bungie previously. 343 understands Halo, appreciates Halo, and is very passionate about it. They know what they're doing. Already, they're showing great promise, and I'm 100% behind them.


And we hope halo 4 doesn't flop lore-wise, and game-wise. It's officially 343's FIRST game. If it's not as stellar as Microsoft is trying to make it sound, 343 and halo might crash and burn damn quick.

  • 07.13.2011 12:28 PM PDT

Cave Johnson here, we're done!

PS: If you are reading this comment while imagining my voice, don't panic. That's just a side effect of the testing.


Posted by: NAStheMagiking
It's like taking an indie game company and asking them to make a AAA title.Well, now that's an exaggeration.

343 is comprised of highly talented guys that love the franchise (and I mean love), and have also worked on big projects prior to working on Halo 4. Some, as you know, worked for Bungie previously. 343 understands Halo, appreciates Halo, and is very passionate about it. They know what they're doing. Already, they're showing great promise, and I'm 100% behind them.


Actually it's far from exaggeration. 343 is comprised of 5 bungie employees and others who we are not familiar with. They only have experience in mediating the canon between both halo wars (which has a lot of weird things happpen in it that makes very little sense canon wise) and halo legends. So far halo waypoint has only been a tool that has loaded videos and commentaries of the basics of canon and community videos.

They haven't even made an actual game yet, and the experience they have is pretty much equal with an indie game company that has at least made one game.

It doesn't matter how much you love a series, it all depends on your ability to work as a company to make a game, which is where my doubt comes in.

  • 07.13.2011 12:32 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

We are all going to get banned aren't we?

Who are the 5 because i only know of 3.

  • 07.13.2011 12:32 PM PDT


Posted by: privet caboose
Some of the things Microsoft did at Kinect this year really impressed me.

The Ghost Recon thing with taking apart your weapon, and then using Kinect to practice firing the rifle at the Range was really awesome.

The Mass Effect voice features looked really good as well.

Kinect can be in third party titles as optional features. They're things that can only add to the experience. If you don't like Kinect, that's fine, don't use these features, but people who complain simply because there's a Kinect feature in the game are the worst.


The problem with it is.

Levels/certain things in a game will be designed FIRSTLY for kinect in mind, Then the non kinect alternative is added on as an after thought.

Halo is such a big franchise and the fans are so far into it, alot of people invest more into halo then they do any other game and don't want it to be overhauled to incorporate the hipsters. Unfortunately it's kind of inevitable because 343 will be looking to expand on the brand and bring in new/more fans not just carry it on for the sake of it.

So anyway it's understandable people are dismissing kinect before any info because at the minute its just too gimmicky.

  • 07.13.2011 12:38 PM PDT

Let your anger be as a monkey in a piñata... hiding amongst the candy... hoping the kids don't break through with the stick!

i want a game that focuses on the Spartan-II's from the books.

  • 07.13.2011 12:41 PM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: privet caboose
Look at what Halo got when it tried to be diverse. ODST didn't get great reviews, half of the fans didn't like it, and the game didn't sell as well as Halo 3.

Even assuming that ODST did not get great reviews and all, (Which I find dubious) all this conveys to me is an appeal to popularity. Just because something is not mainstream and popular does not make it crap. Halo is in with the wrong crowd. Half the fanbase could care less about quality character development and a carefully thought out and clever story/plot. All their primary concerns seem to be around whether or not the BR or the DMR will feature again! Appealing to them on what is best for the quality of the franchises story and characterisation is about as non sequitur as one can get.

All I can see happening, from following these reviews like a dog, is Halo becoming as cheap, meaningless and unoriginal as the lyrics and ideas in Lady Gaga's songs.

Posted by: privet caboose
Now look at Halo: Reach, that's just self explanatory. The characters were dull and boring. There's nothing to "analyze" about them. The story is arguably the worst of the Halo games.

Well I would normally agree to this, but at least Reach gave us a sense of anticipation before it was released as to what its story would be like, what its characters would be like. Now I know what future Halo games will be like, I have had 3 games of it, and it is flat. Bungie had a great opportunity to develop Noble Team but they were not successful. (Trying to do 6 Spartans in one game would never work) That does not automatically mean that the concept of focusing on other characters is innately flawed.

Posted by: privet caboose
But the simple fact is that Master Chief IS Iconic for Halo. A Halo game without the chief is like a Legend of Zelda game without Link. The only difference is, we actually see Chiefs personality in the novels. Where as link hardly has any backstory.

Master Chief may be iconic for Halo but I don't think that it does it justice. Also, Zelda and Halo are completely different franchises with completely different beginnings. Zelda began as an arcade game back in the 80s. The appeal that the two have to their respective fanbases must be different.

Posted by: privet caboose
Chief was always meant to be the hero of the original trilogy. Bungie expanded out and the quality just wasn't as consistent as it was with the Chief. It's only natural Microsoft wants to go back to their "mascot."

Quality is entirely subjective and in this case decided, unfortunately, by the fanbase who by my experience can't tell good story telling from poor, cheap, unoriginal garbage. As I said above, relying on them for a representation of what is "quality" and what is not in the Halo Universe is not wise.

But of course, Microsoft should act accordingly to these statistics right, for business sake? I never thought I would see myself say this but that is called milking, where you consistently and deliberately lower the quality so that you can appeal to the mainstream.

Posted by: privet caboose
Also, you're jumping the gun quite a bit. You sound as if they came out and said, "WE'LL NEVER MAKE A HALO GAME WITHOUT THE CHIEF AGAIN."

This is perhaps the most important thing, and I do hope you are right. But let's consider the logistics of it:

Frankie said that, all the way back when 343 Industries announced themselves, that they had planned to continue the franchise to a minimum of 2016. That is what they have planned. At the time, they had not planned to go any further than that. They have to fit 3 AAA titles into the time between '09 and '16. Easy enough. Add to it other games on the scale of Wars and ODST? Can't see it happening. Of course, they could divide the labour but look how things turned out when Bungie tried it. Reach got the Bungie B team, who didn't quite put their heart and sole into it.

And they implicitly debased Master Chief-less games in that article but never once hinted at spin-offs. In fact they denied that Spin-offs were even planned. As for debasing other Halo games:

"The key question for me in managing the studio and the creatives is 'what is Halo?'"

"What does that mean? Playing Master Chief," he said. "We kind of lost our way a little bit, I'll say. And that's why I wanted to make sure that at the unveiling of Halo 4, you knew you were playing Master Chief, that John was back. Because Master Chief is the John Wayne character of that universe, and that's who you want to play."

"We really spent time thinking about the story arc that we want to tell, in the world, to get back to Master Chief,"

"That's the role I want Halo to play, to be what Halo [already] is."

The implication is overwhelming.

  • 07.13.2011 12:55 PM PDT

C Dickson
Kickin -blam- and taking names
Social Infection

Social infection


Posted by: Wolverfrog
Well, I agree with Spencer.

The ODSTs were good enough but weren't as vital as Master Chief, nor could they do the same things.

And all you need to do is look at the Reach Spartans to see how badly playing as another Spartan can go.

We haven't played as the Chief in four years; it'll be five by the time Halo 4 comes out.

I think he deserves another few rounds. And I can't wait.




agreed

  • 07.13.2011 1:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Do not waste your tears, I was not born to watch the world grow dim. Life is not measured in years, but by the deeds of men.

Posted by: goldhawk
We should know better, because we are better.

I want to see more Chief. I just don't want it to be all Chief, all the time in the games. That would get boring.

  • 07.13.2011 1:48 PM PDT


Posted by: tinyohyeah

Posted by: NAStheMagiking
It's like taking an indie game company and asking them to make a AAA title.Well, now that's an exaggeration.

343 is comprised of highly talented guys that love the franchise (and I mean love), and have also worked on big projects prior to working on Halo 4. Some, as you know, worked for Bungie previously. 343 understands Halo, appreciates Halo, and is very passionate about it. They know what they're doing. Already, they're showing great promise, and I'm 100% behind them.


Actually it's far from exaggeration. 343 is comprised of 5 bungie employees and others who we are not familiar with. They only have experience in mediating the canon between both halo wars (which has a lot of weird things happpen in it that makes very little sense canon wise) and halo legends. So far halo waypoint has only been a tool that has loaded videos and commentaries of the basics of canon and community videos.

They haven't even made an actual game yet, and the experience they have is pretty much equal with an indie game company that has at least made one game.

It doesn't matter how much you love a series, it all depends on your ability to work as a company to make a game, which is where my doubt comes in.
Those, in 343, that have come over from Bungie take the roles of Franchise Development Director, Designer, and Lead Mission Artist; which are key roles overlooking areas of development. Beyond that you have the community managers and so forth, which have been doing a good job over at Waypoint. 343 has been recruiting some of the 'industry's fiercest talent' for some time now; and we have people on 343 that have worked on such games as MGS4, Gears of War and the Mass Effect series. Frankie has stated that those he brings into the team are not just people that are very capable, but who are also there because they love the franchise (which is important).

The studio has brilliant talent, which is growing. With the minds of former Bungie employees (who were in the thick of it), and the talent of people who have helped produce triple A titles, I'd say your comparison was indeed an exaggeration.

  • 07.13.2011 3:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I accidently used the wrong Xbox Live Gamertag on this, oh well :P
My real gamertag is jcgerrard8, if you want to play with me then send me a message :)

All we can do is wait. I have great confidence in 343, espicially in Frank O Connor. Besides, they are made up of few ex-bungie personell and lots of other people who are completely dedicated to the series and who more less live and breath Halo.

I love Bungie, and appreciate everything they did, but they did lose that Halo feel after Halo 3 (still like ODST and Reach though).

  • 07.13.2011 3:38 PM PDT

Cave Johnson here, we're done!

PS: If you are reading this comment while imagining my voice, don't panic. That's just a side effect of the testing.


Posted by: NAStheMagiking
Those, in 343, that have come over from Bungie take the roles of Franchise Development Director, Designer, and Lead Mission Artist; which are key roles overlooking areas of development. Beyond that you have the community managers and so forth, which have been doing a good job over at Waypoint. 343 has been recruiting some of the 'industry's fiercest talent' for some time now; and we have people on 343 that have worked on such games as MGS4, Gears of War and the Mass Effect series. Frankie has stated that those he brings into the team are not just people that are very capable, but who are also there because they love the franchise (which is important).

The studio has brilliant talent, which is growing. With the minds of former Bungie employees (who were in the thick of it), and the talent of people who have helped produce triple A titles, I'd say your comparison was indeed an exaggeration.


I still disagree, it's definitely a company with some talented people, but it's not a company that has been working together on games for years now.

Together being the key word.

A company is as effective as the group of people that inhabit it. And if they are incapable of working together and be able to set appropriate and achievable goals, then they will fail.

Now I'm not saying they will, and I'm not saying they won't, what I am saying is why I feel as though they are likely to fail.

The top developers in the world could all come together and try to create a game and fail simply because the members are all unfamiliar with working on a game such as Halo. The comparison I made was to show how large of a step this was, and I still believe the comparison I made was reasonable.

  • 07.13.2011 3:46 PM PDT

Well, upon seeing this two of my friends have openly stated they predict halo 4 and beyond sucking. I wanna hear Frankie's/343's official comments on this. Any luck finding something like that?

  • 07.13.2011 3:52 PM PDT

Signatures are for squares.


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Well, upon seeing this two of my friends have openly stated they predict halo 4 and beyond sucking. I wanna hear Frankie's/343's official comments on this. Any luck finding something like that?


Oh come now.

We haven't even SEEN any gameplay. We've never even seen ANY TRAILERS. There's not even any information on this game.

343 has done a great job so far. Look at their past projects:

>Evolutions
>Waypoint
>Cryptum
>Halo: Bloodlines
>Halo: Bootcamp
>Halo Legends
>Defiant Mappack
>Halo Encyclopedia
>Novel re-releases

The only "bad" things 343 has done are the Novel Re-releases, which aren't exactly bad. They're great because they did clear up a couple things, and added more to the Halo lore(the added content to the back of the book) and the larger size makes it fit with all the other novels now. The Encyclopedia could be called bad, but that was 343's first project after Waypoint, so I cut them a bit of slack.


Halo: Anniversary is looking fantastic, and I'm sure people won't have anything to complain about. Yet, despite 343 doing a great job with Halo so far, and even asking the community what they want in a Reach Title Update,(something that's LONG overdue) everyone is quick to jump on the 343-hate bandwagon.

It's very clear that I hate Reach. But look at some of my posts from before the game released. I was extremely excited for the game and saved all judgement until after I was finished playing for a couple days. Why is it impossible for other people to do the same?

  • 07.13.2011 5:10 PM PDT

Just to clarify, I'm reserving my judgement until after the game is released, or at least there is far more information out.

The one friend views Halo 4 as increasing the retarded raging Master Chief fanclub who worship the Chief as a god. That's mainly where his anger comes from. He wants Chief to be a character, not some robotic Spartan who gets overrated and put on a pedestal by the fans.

  • 07.13.2011 5:17 PM PDT

Judging from various interviews I've seen, Frank's very passionate about the story-telling within his projects. It's one of the reasons he made the transition to 343 in the first place; to tell various stories within, and expand upon, the universe. We've already received a tidbit telling us that Master Chief's behavior has changed, so I'm optimistic about the development of his character.

  • 07.13.2011 6:11 PM PDT

okay so the way i see halo 4 and the future is well trying new things i'm just hopeful it helps multiplayer and not ruin it tho some of the articles i've read even tho there fake say that weapon customization is a big thing in single player , it also says u can do this during battle via menu .i imagine like a dead space pop up menu in front of chief now if this how they will be taking it i imagine the ghost recon weapon system working nicely ie taking the weapon apart or adding new upgrades. talking about the one at e3 11 if it dose have kinect support. tl;dr we should let halo 4 try new things if it dosnt work 5 and 6 can go retro

  • 07.13.2011 6:27 PM PDT

@accordingto343

Your one stop shop for all of 343's fabulous errors and ridiculous notions in the Halo lore.


>Evolutions
>Waypoint
>Cryptum
>Halo: Bloodlines
>Halo: Bootcamp
>Halo Legends
>Defiant Mappack
>Halo Encyclopedia
>Novel re-releases

Be that as it may Caboose, sans half the work they did for Defiant, those aren't games are they?

  • 07.13.2011 9:02 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4