- CrazyLittleGuy
- |
- Exalted Member
I agree to a point. The brand is still Halo; it followed the same gameplay mechanics, and generally was similar. But it lost a few aspects that made Halo games so enjoyable. Here's a few of the things I personally didn't like.
- Didn't like Chief's new personality, you'd think he would have become even more reclusive and silent after being left alone on Forward Unto Dawn.
- The new enemies got repetitive, frustrating, and confusing. The game and advertising were hyping up this 'open the face to reveal a skull that tortures Chief's mind' thing and that never happened, which was the confusing part. Plus, we were never able to actually get a look at the enemies, since they exploded upon death and fought from a distance. On top of that, there were really just three different types of Forerunner enemies; the Knights, the dog-things, and the flying ones (a lot fell under this category.) Then I got pissed fighting the Knights after a while, since they seemed to be strong enough that they were intended to be strategic fights but they threw in so many that it just became 'fire a lot of bullets like last time.'
- The story seemed to be lacking a bit. It was building up perfectly at the beginning, and the Didact could have been a killer enemy. But you never fought him. In the end, you only fought a couple more Knights than instead. Plus, the Librarian's evolutionary process was odd to me. I get that the Forerunner's dictated the way humans evolved... but they also fought with the humans at the same time? I always thought the humans were the descendants of the Forerunners, their 'heirs.' So the Forerunner's dictated the human's evolution... to be immune to Forerunner tech... while they fought each other... but the Forerunner's had internal conflict... that resolved when they all died, but didn't actually die?
Sorry for the rant, but some issues were nagging me. Feel free to try and explain me wrong, I've still got an open mind to the issue.