- ROBERTO jh
- |
- Fabled Heroic Member
Posted by: J0man1
I'm buying it/Not so sure.
If CEA is anything to go by, then it'll merely be good, more of an imitation and an homage to the spirit of Halo not overly the progression of the franchise, as far as gameplay is concerned.
First game for a virgin studio, the pressure is on.
Yeah the second level is great, I haven't beaten it yet though.
*sarcasm or a time traveler? Which indeed?
Indeed this thread is very necessary, as far as OP is concerned.
CEA was an imitation of past Halo games, and not a progression, because it was a remastering of a past Halo game, not a progression. We can't base 343i's game making talents off of a remake.
Though CEA makes Reach's multiplayer fun as hell.
Posted by: SEAL Sniper 9
We can debate the power of the Grenade Launcher all we want, it still shouldn't magically appear after it not being in the first three games. People need to realize that Halo 4 is the sequel to Halo 3, not Reach.
"The game comes first"
--Frankie, meaning that if an idea promotes gameplay better, but doesn't necessarily fit with the canon, the gameplay comes first. Good gameplay can't take back seat, so if the 'nade launcher is workable in Halo 4 somehow from a gameplay perspective they'll put it in.
[Edited on 12.29.2011 6:16 PM PST]