Okay, I'm just gonna put this out there, that I love Halo 3, CE, 2A and 4 (Reach somewhat, but 2 is terrible). Like @@BaconShelf said, if you want to enjoy those games (except Reach), then play MCC (once it's fully fixed). But in order for Halo to stay relevant, the games need to evolve. Why do you think Call of Duty's repetitivity gets a lot of criticism? Games need to change so they don't become monotonous. I can understand some people disliking Halo 4 because of custom loadouts, as it does change the core structure of the Halo series (though I personally enjoyed it myself) but Halo 5 takes gameplay back to its roots; by being an arena shooter.
Custom loadouts and ordnance drops are gone. And as for the abilities, they add variety to the game. "No special abilities, just skills!" I'm not sure what you mean by that, abilities allow you to gain an advantage in a firefight if you know how to use them properly. Aiming skill is still there, and if you use the abilities wrong, then you'll get killed. The Halo series is known for adding mechanics each game to keep it from becoming too repetitive; Halo 2 added dual-wielding and hijacking, did anyone hate on Bungie for that? Halo 3 added equipment, did anyone hate on Bungie for that? No because it keeps the arena-style gameplay that Halo is known for, but the Spartan Abilities in Halo 5 also don't break the arena-style gameplay either.
-Someone who has played the game.