Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Anyone afraid of Halo 4 becoming something that its not? (longer read)
  • Subject: Anyone afraid of Halo 4 becoming something that its not? (longer read)
Subject: Anyone afraid of Halo 4 becoming something that its not? (longer read)

Today I was thinking about a new game coming out called "Hitman: Absolution." Some of you may know of this game, and if you are a devoted fan like me (whom has played all hitman games), you also may share the belief that the game may end up becoming another game in its entirety due to the change in developers (and to me, the loss of the voice actor for "Agent 47" will also be a loss). Similarly to the "Splinter Cell" series and its transition to the new, fast paced aspects "Splinter Cell: Conviction", Hitman may lose all of its predecessors stealth-based gameplay, replaced with more action-oriented gameplay. Halo 4 will be upon us soon, but due to the change in developers, I don't know if it will be the same. I am not absolutely positive about the game changing, for nothing has been shown of it besides some magazine articles and the teaser. But I am just a little skeptical about the choice of revealing to the public that it will become a trilogy, ahead of even Halo 4 being released. I am hoping that 343 wont rush the releases of the trilogy (akin to the Call of Duty franchise). These are just thoughts; none of these are my solid beliefs, and I still think its going to be a great game. Just wanted to share this with you guys, so discuss. Cheers

  • 02.13.2012 5:16 PM PDT

"At the end of this day one shall stand, one shall fall"

So, Death or Bungie?

Was there one period in that? All I only saw commas.

  • 02.13.2012 5:22 PM PDT

Gamertag: Vengeance304


Posted by: xXstealthtongXx
Today I was thinking about a new game coming out called "Hitman: Absolution." Some of you may know of this game, and if you are a devoted fan like me (whom has played all hitman games), you also may share the belief that the game may end up becoming another game in its entirety due to the change in developers (and to me, the loss of the voice actor for "Agent 47" will also be a loss). Similarly to the "Splinter Cell" series and its transition to the new, fast paced aspects "Splinter Cell: Conviction", Hitman may lose all of its predecessors stealth-based gameplay, replaced with more action-oriented gameplay. Halo 4 will be upon us soon, but due to the change in developers, I don't know if it will be the same. I am not absolutely positive about the game changing, for nothing has been shown of it besides some magazine articles and the teaser. But I am just a little skeptical about the choice of revealing to the public that it will become a trilogy, ahead of even Halo 4 being released. I am hoping that 343 wont rush the releases of the trilogy (akin to the Call of Duty franchise). These are just thoughts; none of these are my solid beliefs, and I still think its going to be a great game. Just wanted to share this with you guys, so discuss. Cheers

That's what a lot of people on these forums are afraid of, which is why 343 needs make Halo 4 a fantastic Halo game to make a good first impression for the new trilogy. I keep on seeing people quote 343 on here saying that they are going to bring Halo back to it's roots gameplay-wise, so it sounds like it won't change too much in that aspect. One thing 343 is doing that I am surprised hasn't raised too much concern is that they are going to develop the Chief's character a little bit, which isn't a bad thing but it is a bit of a gamble (again, this is based on what I have read on the forums, I don't have an exact quote). It'll be interesting to see how they go about it, I just hope they don't mess up.

[Edited on 02.13.2012 6:22 PM PST]

  • 02.13.2012 6:08 PM PDT


Posted by: FinestCrimson
That's what a lot of people on these forums are afraid of, which is why 343 needs make Halo 4 a fantastic Halo game to make a good first impression for the new trilogy. I keep on seeing people quote 343 on here saying that they are going to bring Halo back to it's roots gameplay-wise, so it sounds like it won't change too much in that aspect. One thing 343 is doing that I am surprised hasn't raised too much concern is that they are going to develop the Chief's character a little bit, which isn't a bad thing but it is a bit of a gamble (again, this is based on what I have read on the forums, I don't have an exact quote). It'll be interesting to see how they go about it, I just hope they don't mess up.

This is what I'm most worried about(bold part). Bungie has always pushed the Halo series forwards, constantly evolving the gameplay. The minute 343i got it's hands on Reach, they attempted to turn it into Halo 3 with the TU and such. Much of it was a result of a whiny minority and 343i caving to them.

I'm worried that 343i isn't fully confident in their own abilities and just piggy back off of the Halo franchise instead of having Halo 4 stand strongly on its own. Much the same thing that they are currently trying to do to Reach.

  • 02.13.2012 7:25 PM PDT

Gamertag: Vengeance304


Posted by: PyratRum7

Posted by: FinestCrimson
That's what a lot of people on these forums are afraid of, which is why 343 needs make Halo 4 a fantastic Halo game to make a good first impression for the new trilogy. I keep on seeing people quote 343 on here saying that they are going to bring Halo back to it's roots gameplay-wise, so it sounds like it won't change too much in that aspect. One thing 343 is doing that I am surprised hasn't raised too much concern is that they are going to develop the Chief's character a little bit, which isn't a bad thing but it is a bit of a gamble (again, this is based on what I have read on the forums, I don't have an exact quote). It'll be interesting to see how they go about it, I just hope they don't mess up.

This is what I'm most worried about(bold part). Bungie has always pushed the Halo series forwards, constantly evolving the gameplay. The minute 343i got it's hands on Reach, they attempted to turn it into Halo 3 with the TU and such. Much of it was a result of a whiny minority and 343i caving to them.

I'm worried that 343i isn't fully confident in their own abilities and just piggy back off of the Halo franchise instead of having Halo 4 stand strongly on its own. Much the same thing that they are currently trying to do to Reach.


I agree for the most part. I thought Halo 3 was fantastic but I don't want to pay $60 for an updated version of it. I hope they do go back to Halo's roots to a certain extent (I didn't like the direction Bungie took with Reach, although it is good that they tried to change it up a little bit), but 343 does need to bring something new to keep the gameplay from becoming boring.

[Edited on 02.13.2012 7:40 PM PST]

  • 02.13.2012 7:40 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

:)


Posted by: PyratRum7

Posted by: FinestCrimson
That's what a lot of people on these forums are afraid of, which is why 343 needs make Halo 4 a fantastic Halo game to make a good first impression for the new trilogy. I keep on seeing people quote 343 on here saying that they are going to bring Halo back to it's roots gameplay-wise, so it sounds like it won't change too much in that aspect. One thing 343 is doing that I am surprised hasn't raised too much concern is that they are going to develop the Chief's character a little bit, which isn't a bad thing but it is a bit of a gamble (again, this is based on what I have read on the forums, I don't have an exact quote). It'll be interesting to see how they go about it, I just hope they don't mess up.

This is what I'm most worried about(bold part). Bungie has always pushed the Halo series forwards, constantly evolving the gameplay. The minute 343i got it's hands on Reach, they attempted to turn it into Halo 3 with the TU and such. Much of it was a result of a whiny minority and 343i caving to them.

I'm worried that 343i isn't fully confident in their own abilities and just piggy back off of the Halo franchise instead of having Halo 4 stand strongly on its own. Much the same thing that they are currently trying to do to Reach.

>Implying Reach was perfect before.

  • 02.13.2012 7:56 PM PDT

Posted by: Commander GX
Bungie.Match.com: Our Johnson knows what the ladies like.


Posted by: Septagon7th
Was there one period in that? All I only saw commas.


I counted 9.

  • 02.13.2012 8:39 PM PDT


Posted by: jross1993

Posted by: PyratRum7

Posted by: FinestCrimson
That's what a lot of people on these forums are afraid of, which is why 343 needs make Halo 4 a fantastic Halo game to make a good first impression for the new trilogy. I keep on seeing people quote 343 on here saying that they are going to bring Halo back to it's roots gameplay-wise, so it sounds like it won't change too much in that aspect. One thing 343 is doing that I am surprised hasn't raised too much concern is that they are going to develop the Chief's character a little bit, which isn't a bad thing but it is a bit of a gamble (again, this is based on what I have read on the forums, I don't have an exact quote). It'll be interesting to see how they go about it, I just hope they don't mess up.

This is what I'm most worried about(bold part). Bungie has always pushed the Halo series forwards, constantly evolving the gameplay. The minute 343i got it's hands on Reach, they attempted to turn it into Halo 3 with the TU and such. Much of it was a result of a whiny minority and 343i caving to them.

I'm worried that 343i isn't fully confident in their own abilities and just piggy back off of the Halo franchise instead of having Halo 4 stand strongly on its own. Much the same thing that they are currently trying to do to Reach.

>Implying Reach was perfect before.
No, I wasn't. But 343i is trying to turn Reach into something it's not; in this case, Halo 3. I bought Reach so that I could play Reach, not Halo 3. If I want to play Halo 3, or any previous entry in the series, I'll stick their disc my Xbox/360.

Same thing goes for Halo 4. I want Halo 4, not a rehash of Halo 3 or Reach.

  • 02.13.2012 8:58 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

:)

Posted by: PyratRum7
No, I wasn't. But 343i is trying to turn Reach into something it's not; in this case, Halo 3. I bought Reach so that I could play Reach, not Halo 3. If I want to play Halo 3, or any previous entry in the series, I'll stick their disc my Xbox/360.

Same thing goes for Halo 4. I want Halo 4, not a rehash of Halo 3 or Reach.

343i are trying to turn Reach into a game worth playing, and that's coming from someone who has played Halo since its release in 2001.

While I agree that they should expand forwards and not just make a Halo 3, Reach is regarded by many, including myself, as the worst Halo game to date and 343i are trying to fix that.

  • 02.13.2012 10:22 PM PDT

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

Posted by: PyratRum7
I bought Reach so that I could play Reach, not Halo 3.


I brought Reach to play Halo. What I got was something else entirely, whilst Halo is indeed constantly evolving Reach was a push in the wrong direction by convoluting Halo's tried-and-true gameplay formula with generic and game-changing inclusions (e.g. AAs).

Equipment was tolerable in Halo 3 because it had such a long respawn time (usually around a minute) and they could counter each other (e.g. Power Drain + Regenerator). AAs are just ridiculous. I want Halo 4 to evolve, but I want it to stick to the foundations set about by Halo CE-ODST, not what Reach started bringing in.

[Edited on 02.14.2012 4:19 AM PST]

  • 02.14.2012 4:18 AM PDT

One cone to splatter em all!!


Posted by: ajw34307
Posted by: PyratRum7
I bought Reach so that I could play Reach, not Halo 3.


I brought Reach to play Halo. What I got was something else entirely, whilst Halo is indeed constantly evolving Reach was a push in the wrong direction by convoluting Halo's tried-and-true gameplay formula with generic and game-changing inclusions (e.g. AAs).

Equipment was tolerable in Halo 3 because it had such a long respawn time (usually around a minute) and they could counter each other (e.g. Power Drain + Regenerator). AAs are just ridiculous. I want Halo 4 to evolve, but I want it to stick to the foundations set about by Halo CE-ODST, not what Reach started bringing in.


I understand where your coming from. AS I understand it halo reach wasn't part of the trilogy. They had a contract to make five games. Thus the trilogie. Halo odst wich was a a sideproject and reach. Reach was the vision of gameplay and graphics that the bungie wanted to do troughout the series but never got the chance. You know landing burning planes and al the other stuff that's part of their job description.

SO rather see reach as their visual masterpiece with the bonuses that they've always wanted to do. I'm still smashed up in love with the halo trilogie but you will almost nevver catch me playing any of the old stuff as often as reach. You know why. One word Netcode baby :).

Anyways just trying to put things in perspective cause I was kinda bummed on rach aswell in the beginning, especially after I finished campaign. Now and then some AA's still piss me off but heck at least we have pro and classic game modes so it isn't overdone in every match.



[Edited on 02.14.2012 4:32 AM PST]

  • 02.14.2012 4:32 AM PDT

Haters are going to hate.
Praisers are going to praise.

The Bungie Forums are what keeps my mind sharp and my fingers active, between writing my own movie scripts, drawing, and studying industrial design. At the moment I'm working on miniatures for a short movie that I'll hopefully be able to film once I've saved up for a camera... That's me, with the mug, trying to have a conversation with Konoko.

It has already happened if you ask me. If an IP is worked on that long; seen the amount of installmens and products as Halo has, sooner or later it will have explored aspects that not necesarily feel as something the original core group of producst did. Mostly due to it being developed by many different individuals, with different styles and preferences, beliefs, virtues and sins.

Now while I don't think that the product--in this case Halo 4--will become a bad game just because of a change of hands, not at all, I do think it might feel completely differnet. And that difference might not click with me, as Halo 1,2,3 did. And if they don't feel the same, why do they carry the same name? ...

I see time and time again that the game is being defended with the arguement that a lot of key individuals from Bungie went along with Halo to Microsoft, that there are a lot of tallented people working on the game, but just think of everyone who stayed: like Marty (the music won't be the same), Joseph (the script won't be the same), ect, etc.

If you can't genuinely create a game in a certain way, if you have to mimic someone else's style in order to produce a result; you're doing it wrong.
This is what I'm afraid of: when making a game becomes a job, and not a passion project. (Why I'm looking forward to see what Bungie's next game is, and not Halo 4).

EDIT:
Now when I come to think of it; there's a really good example of when Halo doesn't feel Halo, which 343i is responsible for, and that is 343 himself. The way he talks and what he says--even if he's voiced by the same guy--feels totally off. Mainly cause he talks way to much, but also cause he pronounces specifics with emotion, something the Staten and O'Donnell directed 343 never did. Just listen to them side by side and you'll hear.

[Edited on 02.14.2012 7:10 AM PST]

  • 02.14.2012 5:07 AM PDT

I have faith in 343 that they'll do Halo right.
Unless they pull a 'DICE' and abandon their core audience and make Halo a CoD Clone in order to appeal to CoD's audience. I honestly can't see 343i changing the game so drastically.

Sure, it won't be Halo as we know it, but surely 343i would try to emulate the Halo feeling that we all know and love.

[Edited on 02.14.2012 5:35 AM PST]

  • 02.14.2012 5:33 AM PDT