Halo 3: ODST Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Do you think that ODST ruined the Halo franchise?
  • Subject: Do you think that ODST ruined the Halo franchise?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Do you think that ODST ruined the Halo franchise?

i am myself

reach sorta killed it in some ways but odst was definently NOT the best

  • 08.06.2011 1:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

LOL no. Only Reach is bad enough to accomplish such a feat.

ODST isn't even bad.

  • 08.06.2011 1:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: The Gurminator

Posted by: JMcDon15

Posted by: ImaginarySkyGuy

Posted by: JMcDon15
But I think we can all agree that Call of Duty's series beats Halo's right now.



umm... no.

The first modern warfare stole my attention for a little bit, but I got bored with the cod series after that.

Halo Rules.

This isn't about your personal opinion. Black Ops has way more players online than Reach...

And Biber has more views on YT than some of my favorite bands. No he dosent beat them. Popularity dosent mean anything. Lots of people voted for Bush, we saw how that went...

Halo games quality > Call of Duty games quality. This is my opinion, as it is yours. One opinion isn't superior to others'. Ask anyone outside Bungie forums which game they prefer, Black Ops or ODST and they will surely tell you Black Ops. Since there are way more players devoted to Call of Duty games than Halo, Call of Duty beats Halo. Youtube video views isn't a good comparison. Comparing album sales would be.

  • 08.06.2011 2:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: sniperfirez

Posted by: JMcDon15

This isn't about your personal opinion. Black Ops has way more players online than Reach...


That is the arguement of majority, which is actually a logical fallacy. Just because the German people voted for Hitler doesn't mean he was what was best for Germany. We all saw how that went down...

Yes but he did beat all the other candidates. So whos logic is fallacy?

  • 08.06.2011 3:08 PM PDT

ODST was attached to the halo series. during halo reach when Kat announces the plan to go inside the covenant mother ship, they actualy send in the ODST soldiers in which is where the game comes in, but if u have played ODST, the ODST actualy miss the ship thats why you go in to the ship with the saber.

  • 08.06.2011 3:16 PM PDT

I acknowledge my user name is stupid. However, I promise I'm not.

Disclaimer: The latter is a lie.

GTFO.

  • 08.06.2011 6:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

To the OP. Absolutly not. The ODST campaign was amazing, and IMO only second to the Halo: CE campaign...

I really can't understand how the game was not generally well recieved.

  • 08.06.2011 6:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Elitethemike
To the OP. Absolutly not. The ODST campaign was amazing, and IMO only second to the Halo: CE campaign...

I really can't understand how the game was not generally well recieved.

If the game was not generally well recieved, then how can you answer with an "Absolutly not"? Do you understand the question?

  • 08.06.2011 7:38 PM PDT

I was a bit dissapointed with ODST at first but then I realized that it had one of the best campaigns in the series.

I was also dissapointed with reach for awhile but I recently started playing again and remembered how much i loved it. ( It also helps that i played different game types)

My point is the halo series is still great and no matter how much I like the cod series (Black Ops is really fun especially zombies) I still think the Halo series is better.

  • 08.06.2011 8:25 PM PDT

Posted by: JMcDon15
But I think we can all agree that Call of Duty's series beats Halo's right now.


Stopped reading right there. You're either a troll or younger than 12. Either way, I'm starting to suspect that you're too stupid to waste my time on if you think call of duty has a chance of beating Halo. Reach was pretty fun, but ODST was one of the best. I liked playing a normal human and not a supersoldier that could make Chuck Norris cry.

[Edited on 08.07.2011 1:33 PM PDT]

  • 08.07.2011 1:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Ed Nejo
Posted by: JMcDon15
But I think we can all agree that Call of Duty's series beats Halo's right now.


Stopped reading right there. You're either a troll or younger than 12. Either way, I'm starting to suspect that you're too stupid to waste my time on if you think call of duty has a chance of beating Halo. Reach was pretty fun, but ODST was one of the best. I liked playing a normal human and not a supersoldier that could make Chuck Norris cry.

Wow. Reading through your reply, there is no reason you should be questioning me about being young or a troll. I seriously can't tell if your just messing around or you really are the ignorant, immature little fanboy that you sound like. Your whole post was based on your own opinion about how you think that ODST is "the best" and that it is superior to my idea that that CoD is ahead of Halo at this time. I figured I wouldn't get flamed for saying this. CoD is selling more games, has more players, and makes more money. Read through some of the other replies. I even said that I prefer Halo over CoD. But I guess your too arrogant to even read beyond my first two sentences. Perfect example of someone who types before they think.

[Edited on 08.07.2011 3:19 PM PDT]

  • 08.07.2011 3:16 PM PDT

The Halo franchise has not been ruined at all!
the ODST campaign is awesome, and reach has changed
(armour abilities etc)
because it has to move with the times!
the can't just churn out another game like halo 3,
It would be pointless!

  • 08.07.2011 5:33 PM PDT

Feet First Into Hell.
ODST General since Halo 2
Xbox Live status - Repaired

www.judgegame.com


Posted by: JMcDon15
Ruined is deffinately a harsh word. But I think we can all agree that Call of Duty's series beats Halo's right now.


Ruined is not just harsh but an extreme exaggeration, but define what it is that is making the CoD series beat Halo? If its a numbers game there is no real point when its a single console game vs. a multi-platform game.

ODST certainly wasn't what many were expecting but many such as myself think its one of the more unique and thus enjoyable games of the series.

[Edited on 08.07.2011 5:36 PM PDT]

  • 08.07.2011 5:33 PM PDT

Only the consideration of other gives your words meaning

Nothing ruined anything, there are still people who enjoy all of the Halo series in their own way, People enjoy showing off and being socially negative to exert emotional stress upon a random online player, that's our generation. So when they heard there wasn't multiplayer and they actually had to pay attention to the campaign they abandoned it. Tells you a little about everybody.

  • 08.07.2011 6:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: ODST General

Posted by: JMcDon15
Ruined is deffinately a harsh word. But I think we can all agree that Call of Duty's series beats Halo's right now.


Ruined is not just harsh but an extreme exaggeration, but define what it is that is making the CoD series beat Halo? If its a numbers game there is no real point when its a single console game vs. a multi-platform game.

ODST certainly wasn't what many were expecting but many such as myself think its one of the more unique and thus enjoyable games of the series.


I agree. I only used the word "ruined" because I couldn't think of a better word to replace it. But even exclusively on Xbox, there are way more players online than any Halo.

I also loved ODST. I think that the Campaign was good, no matter how short it was. I loved the detective/noir feel of it. Firefight was nothing short of amazing. The music was superb. Bungie said in the ViDoc that they made ODST for them, not Microsoft and that might have been a mistake.

After ODST came out (around MW2's release), there was a huge dent in the Halo-fans population that wasn't present during Halo 3's time. My friends that were die hard Halo fans used ODST only for vidmasters. The rest of my Halo friends didn't even bother with it when they found out there was no Multiplayer. And that is when everyone bought Modern Warfare 2 for some online multiplayer. All my friends prefered it over Halo (including myself). I didn't even want to buy Reach because I loved MW2 so much.

Halo 3 was the game that everybody played and there were few CoD players. ODST received some anticipation. Reach got little attention from the moment it was announced. Everybody was too excited for Black Ops. Some of my friends bought Reach but were turned off by all the things people hate about it (armor lock, bloom, ect.). You can't say that Reach is responsible for the decreased amount of Halo players when it is the newest release. More players left after ODST's release than Reach's. Call of Duty receives all the attention that Halo once had and it's not just because CoD is multiplatform. I have yet to hear an argument that counters this because there isn't one. CoD now is the game that everyone plays.

  • 08.07.2011 8:05 PM PDT

most idiots don't know that odst was more or less a subproject and therefore had no adequete multiplayer. subsequently they assumed Reach was like odst and therefore did not buy it. btw what do you think of fully forgable firefight maps?

  • 08.07.2011 8:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Lazergoespewpew
most idiots don't know that odst was more or less a subproject and therefore had no adequete multiplayer. subsequently they assumed Reach was like odst and therefore did not buy it. btw what do you think of fully forgable firefight maps?

Agreed. And I think Forgeable firefight maps would be good, but really hard. I was actually just thinking about that today. There's so much more involved with Firefight than Multiplayer.

  • 08.07.2011 8:24 PM PDT

Feet First Into Hell.
ODST General since Halo 2
Xbox Live status - Repaired

www.judgegame.com

You could argue that ODST had a negative impact on the franchise in that it did nothing to hold fans for a long period of time in most cases. However had ODST not existed there would have been no Halo game there at all.

Reach did have a good population, however it quickly dropped off for one reason or another. The first Modern Warfare did a great deal to bolster the series to its current height. But don't forget Call of Duty was always a big game, it just took some fine tuning to gain more fans.

  • 08.07.2011 8:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: ODST General
You could argue that ODST had a negative impact on the franchise in that it did nothing to hold fans for a long period of time in most cases. However had ODST not existed there would have been no Halo game there at all.


This is basically what I've been trying to say the whole time. And whether or not ODST's creation made people abandon Halo games. I don't see why so many people inturpreted it as "Do you think ODST sucked?"

And it's not just ODST, not many people were impressed with Halo Wars but stayed loyal to Halo 3 (I know Bungie didn't make it, but does everyone else?). My theory is that people like to play the newest release and since they didn't like the newest release, they left.

Reach did have a good population, however it quickly dropped off for one reason or another.
But was it as impressive as Halo 3's or Black Ops'?

The first Modern Warfare did a great deal to bolster the series to its current height. But don't forget Call of Duty was always a big game, it just took some fine tuning to gain more fans.


Yeah, I agree. But it never took as big of risks as Halo had. Examples are: Armor Abilities, Removal of the True Skill ranking system, Removing the primary weapon from the previous game for the new release. I see people complaining about how Call of Duty just releases the same thing every year.

  • 08.07.2011 9:03 PM PDT

Feet First Into Hell.
ODST General since Halo 2
Xbox Live status - Repaired

www.judgegame.com

What I am getting at is even if ODST had not existed those people would have left regardless. Also I don't know any numbers right off hand, but I do believe it was on par with Halo 3 in its prime. I know many people hoped for Reach to be different. However I think many just burned themselves out on it and never went back.

Going from CoD 2 to Modern Warfare the changes were massive. Going from WWII to Modern Settings for the first time, total revamping of the multiplayer. Replacing a "realistic" war experience with an over the top action story filled with explosions. Kill streaks, unlocks, and more. Call of Duty took huge risks at one point and it paid off in a big way.

That being said they are turning it into the Madden of shooters changing little from release to release. Honestly I don't feel Treyarch puts the heart and/or is given the opportunity to take real risks with the series.

But that is getting off topic, the point is with or without ODST those people would have left. Call of Duty was next in line in the shooter market. Call of Duty has always avoided this issue with having short periods between releases. Which is a large part of how they avoid losing their player bases interest.

  • 08.07.2011 9:14 PM PDT

OP, you made the following assumptions, all of which are wrong:
1)Multiplayer is the only selling point of Halo games
2)Shooter fans purchase games solely for multiplayer
3)Gamers can only play one game at a time

For example, I like Halo campaigns better than Halo multiplayers, I buy most of my games for the single-player content, and I played ODST and MW2 side-by-side without getting sick of either,

  • 08.07.2011 9:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: ODST General
What I am getting at is even if ODST had not existed those people would have left regardless. Also I don't know any numbers right off hand, but I do believe it was on par with Halo 3 in its prime. I know many people hoped for Reach to be different. However I think many just burned themselves out on it and never went back.

Going from CoD 2 to Modern Warfare the changes were massive. Going from WWII to Modern Settings for the first time, total revamping of the multiplayer. Replacing a "realistic" war experience with an over the top action story filled with explosions. Kill streaks, unlocks, and more. Call of Duty took huge risks at one point and it paid off in a big way.

That being said they are turning it into the Madden of shooters changing little from release to release. Honestly I don't feel Treyarch puts the heart and/or is given the opportunity to take real risks with the series.

But that is getting off topic, the point is with or without ODST those people would have left. Call of Duty was next in line in the shooter market. Call of Duty has always avoided this issue with having short periods between releases. Which is a large part of how they avoid losing their player bases interest.


You got me there. I guess you're right. And yeah, I never really looked back from Call of Duty 3 to Modern Warfare. They made some big changes. I was just thinking about Modern Warfare to Black Ops. Not much has changed.

I wanted to basically know if you thought that making ODST was a good choice or a bad choice. Whether Reach would have got more attention if not for ODST. But that's why I put this question into a poll. I don't think one answer is correct and one is wrong. I just wanted to see what peoples' opinions were, which turned out to be mostly biased.

  • 08.07.2011 9:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: xUNCxLEGENDARYx
1)Multiplayer is the only selling point of Halo games


It used to be... I will admit, I bought Reach because I was impressed with Forge and Firefight. But when I start up Reach, I play for Matchmaking.

2)Shooter fans purchase games solely for multiplayer

Find a Call of Duty player or Battlefield player that bought their game to play campaign.

3)Gamers can only play one game at a time

True, but in most cases, gamers pick favorites and only stick with that one. This only applys to shooters, which is what the topic is about.

For example, I like Halo campaigns better than Halo multiplayers, I buy most of my games for the single-player content, and I played ODST and MW2 side-by-side without getting sick of either,

You are one among few. People don't seem to realise that I am talking about the majority of Shooter gamers.

  • 08.07.2011 9:50 PM PDT

- Against the moa burger since 7.7.11.

It's simple: Halo ODST did not ruin Halo. (thought halo 4 probably will). I'm an all round gamer, I play strategy, FPS, MMO, etc. And I have to say I always find myself coming back to ODST. I play COD and it's a meh, but when I sit down to play some good old ODST It always brings entertainment. I remember spending a good 3 hours on one firefight match with a buddy. So in my opinion 'no'. ODST did not ruin Halo.

  • 08.07.2011 11:13 PM PDT

The campaign is amazing, Bungie regarded it as the best one they've done, and I personally could never decide but it's definitely top notch.

  • 08.08.2011 12:39 AM PDT

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