Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Halo 4- Necessary?
  • Subject: Halo 4- Necessary?
Subject: Halo 4- Necessary?

Have faith in me

Now, 343i Industries has announced a Halo 4 coming out in 2012. No one knows for sure WHEN in 2012 but its a definite. Ok, in Halo 3 in the ending people call 'The Lengendary Ending", Master Chief finishes the fight. Also as I heard in Wiki or another fact site, Master Chief was supposed to finish the battle in Halo 3. Yes, Halo 4 is part of a new trilogy, but is it really needed in the Halo Franchise?

1: There are many games in the Halo Universe, Halo, Halo: Combat Evovled, Halo 2, Halo 3, Halo 3: ODST, Halo: Reach and the new game, Halo: Combat Evovled Anniversary, coming Holiday of 2011. There are already 5 games in the Halo Franchise and the upcoming anniversary. Isnt it enough?

2: People were sad when Halo 2 servers shut down, right? Now Halo 3 and Halo: Reach are here. Thanks to Reach, Halo 3 players are starting to hear about 343 shutting down the servers. Halo 3 is a great addition to the Halo Universe. It is one of the most played games. Would you shut down the servers?

3: There have been many complaints about Reach. People are dissapointed about the quality. People expected a great campaign, maps and multiplayer. But they had to lower there expectations because Reach lacked ALL OF IT. Yes, Reach is a great game but not as good as H3. What if Halo 4 is like Reach or worse? Would you buy it? Consider it? Protest it?

Making Halo 4 would be great, but what would happen to Halo 3, ODST, Reach? Think about those POPULAR games. How do you KNOW Halo 4 will be popular. What if it isnt and you close the Halo 3 servers? Will you lose fans? What about jobs, money? Its not only about YOU, think of the players. Would they buy your product? Or will it be like Reach-
1. Too expensive
2. Disappointing
3. Lack of players

Thanks!

[Edited on 08.13.2011 5:11 PM PDT]

  • 08.13.2011 5:10 PM PDT

Halo 4 is probabaly coming out Holiday 2012 sinceits a big release and usually big releases will fall into the holiday window. Halo 3 will be shutdown one way or another, but Halo reach wont be for a long time. Think about it,Halo 3 has been out for almost 4 years, reach hasnt even been out for one year. The anniversary edition will have reach's multiplayer, so that just adds another year to reach, sort of renewing it. So I believe that Reach will have a long multiplayer life span. And also I think that 343 wil make a more classic Halo experience and make it a lot better than reach. Also I'm sure halo fans wil be excited to see what happens to Master Chief. So it will probabaly make the fan base even bigger.

  • 08.13.2011 5:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I'm listeni- Oh wait I don't give a -blam!- what you have to say.

No.

  • 08.13.2011 6:02 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member

you cannot compare Halo 3 to Reach, Reach is not a game, its a disc in a plastic green case called pure fail.

Got it? good.

Halo 3 was a great way to end things. But once Reach came out it ruined everything so we need Halo 4, 5, and 6 now to set things back in order.

  • 08.13.2011 6:06 PM PDT

Okay, Halo ODST was to some people:

1. Too expensive-
2. Disappointing-
3. (But I don't know about player count, I didn't play firefight much)-

-because of the short campaign and the 60 dollar buy-in-store rate [it could be argued that the map pack disk for Halo 3 made it worth it]

And Halo Reach, well, the campaign was kind of lacking with plot and character development, but that's how it is when you are taking orders from your superiors, not trying to improvise everything on your own. The extras in Reach, though, I think are better than Halo 3. The armor abilities really up the ante. And don't forget the improved forge lobby.

And the Halo 3 server issue, they still have the servers up for Chromehounds, a game that came out a year before Halo 3 and the player count= "OMG!! I can't believe there are still people playing this." If Xbox Live can keep people paying money to play Halo 3 on the servers, they'll keep it around.

And don't forget the people who play games for the story, not the actual game play or multiplayer.

[Edited on 08.13.2011 6:15 PM PDT]

  • 08.13.2011 6:10 PM PDT

Have faith in me

You're all making great points. Yes people will be excited and yes, making those 4, 5, and 6th games will be great, but what if Reach WASNT here? Would it be necessary then?

  • 08.13.2011 6:14 PM PDT

I don't know, a Forerunner game would be kinda cool, I think.

  • 08.13.2011 6:34 PM PDT

Pmorris117

9/18/2012

  • 08.13.2011 8:01 PM PDT

Guide to immortality : Sleep with Life

I had a pretty big time thread once.

Here's me bragging about it.


Posted by: N7R
Halo 3 was a great way to end things. But once Reach came out it ruined everything so we need Halo 4, 5, and 6 now to set things back in order.
Yup.

  • 08.13.2011 10:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend

first off the only reason the H2 servers were -blam!- off, was because the 360 came out, and all the servers were shut off.

Secondly reach and H3 are on the same 360 servers and cannot be shut down separately.

Aside from those reach was a massive disappointment, and H4 should revive the series assuming its done well. SC2 has already taken over halos spot as mainstage game on the MLG circuit, hopefully H4 will reclaim its lost honor.

  • 08.13.2011 10:10 PM PDT

all i say is that i hope 343 dont stuff up halo 4 and better be careful of the content they put into it. So please 343, dont let it be another halo reach!

  • 08.13.2011 10:39 PM PDT

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.

So... much... idiocy...

Posted by: tylerhalo8509
Ok, in Halo 3 in the ending people call 'The Lengendary Ending", Master Chief finishes the fight. Also as I heard in Wiki or another fact site, Master Chief was supposed to finish the battle in Halo 3. Yes, Halo 4 is part of a new trilogy, but is it really needed in the Halo Franchise?


Firstly, the Legendary Ending shows the Dawn drifting towards a Forerunner planet. Given what Mendicant Bias tells us in the final Terminal at the end of Halo 3, he is sending John to the Forerunners as proof of his atonement. That ALONE opens up the potential for a whole new trilogy.

Yes, on the basis of the story Halo 4 is necessary. The Human-Covenant war was a small part of a much larger story revolving around the Forerunners, Precursors, Mendicant Bias and the Flood.

1: There are many games in the Halo Universe, Halo, Halo: Combat Evovled, Halo 2, Halo 3, Halo 3: ODST, Halo: Reach and the new game, Halo: Combat Evovled Anniversary, coming Holiday of 2011. There are already 5 games in the Halo Franchise and the upcoming anniversary. Isnt it enough?

Why does the quantity of games matter? Look at Final Fantasy, Mario and other franchises that have well over a dozen games. If 343 can pull off a good game and do it right, then why should the quantity matter as long as the quality is good?

Also, you missed out Halo Wars.

2: People were sad when Halo 2 servers shut down, right? Now Halo 3 and Halo: Reach are here. Thanks to Reach, Halo 3 players are starting to hear about 343 shutting down the servers. Halo 3 is a great addition to the Halo Universe. It is one of the most played games. Would you shut down the servers?

Halo 3's servers are NOT BEING SHUT DOWN. I don't know where people get this bollocks from, it won't be shut down until the 360 becomes obselete.

3: There have been many complaints about Reach. People are dissapointed about the quality. People expected a great campaign, maps and multiplayer. But they had to lower there expectations because Reach lacked ALL OF IT. Yes, Reach is a great game but not as good as H3. What if Halo 4 is like Reach or worse? Would you buy it? Consider it? Protest it?

How about you give 343 a chance? They've got some of the best writers in sci-fi history; they've got the level designers from Metroid (whom I hear are very good); they've got the composer of the MGS soundtrack (who has compose some sublime tracks and will do Halo justice) and other professional game developers who have been working on Halo 4 since early-2009.

"What if" is an irrelevant question since we know next to nothing about Halo 4.

Making Halo 4 would be great, but what would happen to Halo 3, ODST, Reach? Think about those POPULAR games. How do you KNOW Halo 4 will be popular. What if it isnt and you close the Halo 3 servers? Will you lose fans? What about jobs, money? Its not only about YOU, think of the players. Would they buy your product? Or will it be like Reach-
1. Too expensive
2. Disappointing
3. Lack of players

Thanks!


It's a Halo game, it's going to be popular just from the name being printed on the box - even more so because it's the continuation of John's story, which people have been gagging to see since the end of Halo 3.

Whether they lose fans will depend on the quality of the game. If they manage to pull it off, then great, they'll get more fans and thus the game will become more popular. But why should popularity matter anyway? It's Halo, it's a quality franchise.

NOTHING is going to happen to Halo 3, ODST or Reach. No servers are being shut down, nothing is changing.

  • 08.14.2011 5:59 AM PDT


Posted by: QuestVibes
Halo 3 and Reach run on the same servers. They won't go down until the Live for 360 goes down.

  • 08.14.2011 9:53 AM PDT