I want people's thoughts on Halo's future...

[Fox McCloud]

Does anyone think that Bungie could take over Halo, in the future? I am somewhat intrigued, by the idea. It just popped into my head, after initially playing H5. Could Microsoft come to the conclusion, that Halo is dying? Many of you, may be thinking... "Fox, Bungie isn't going to come back to Microsoft, let alone Halo." That may be true. Bungie might not come back to Halo. I just think that Halo needs a re-branding, of some kind. It needs to return to what, we loved. That was a slower FPS, that branded itself as something, entirely different then anything else. It was such a different style of game, compared to anything else on the market. I am entirely wondering, what others think about this. As I have been pondering, what is to become of the game, I once loved. 

 

Sorry for not being as active, friends. <3

[Yoshi1176]

I can't say that I agree with you even in the slightest. I love the way the game is going and I think 343 is doing an amazing job to be completely honest.

 

But hey, we all have our own ideas of what we want in Halo.

 

Going back to Bungie (would never happen) but even going back to old Halo ways would be a colossal step back I think. 343 does an amazing job at keeping pace with the community I think. 

[Fishy]

Fox, let me see your hand.

 

 

 

 

[Unease Peanut]

I dread to think going back to the inbalanced gameplay of 1 and 2 and the sluggish Halo 3 movement. Although they were great for their time it just wouldn't work out as well anymore.

Also the more I look at Destiny the happier I am with 343 taking over, yes they have their flaws but they're doing a good job.

[Twinreaper]

Let's be honest and unbiased for once guys. You CANNOT call Halo 5 a success on any level, nor can you call 343 a success and honestly say their direction is good.

 

Halo 5 is the equivalent to Colonial Marines. No other Halo game has ever shipped more incomplete and broken than Halo 5. I'd count MCC but that was not all 343, as Saber and CA are also to blame.

 

Halo 1 and 2 were in no way unbalanced. I'd like to see some actual game data facts to shlw how it isnt. Halo 3 was not any slower gameplay wise than 1 & 2. The only reason ot feels slower, as does the previous titles, is because of the increase in post Halo 3 gameplay. It is simple to play Halo Reach and 4/5 and then go play the prequels and feel sluggish.

 

Bungie would never go back to taking over Halo, that isn't even a possibility no matter how much money would be thrown their way. As for Destiny comparisons, please stop trying to compare the development issues to 343 and Bungie's shortcomings. No one here at this site has any sort of right to do so, nor do they have any credentials or experience to back up those claims.

 

At the end of the day you have to agree that on many levels that something needs to change with Halo. 343 is doing an utterly abysmal job and it is very very clear they do NOT listen to anyone and they have no idea what they are doing

[Yoshi1176]

Twin, pretty much everything that's been done in Halo 5 has been stuff that the community has asked for. 343 does listen, they are extremely engaged in the community.

 

Incomplete? Fore not being in game at launch doesn't mean it's incomplete. Just like them goving us a constant flow of new things doesn't make the game incomplete.

 

Game isn't exactly broken either, it has some bugs but that's in any game. I think the best forge we have ever seen and one of the best multiplayers counteracts that.

[Unease Peanut]

Halo 1 and 2 were in no way unbalanced. I'd like to see some actual game data facts to shlw how it isnt. Halo 3 was not any slower gameplay wise than 1 & 2. The only reason ot feels slower, as does the previous titles, is because of the increase in post Halo 3 gameplay. It is simple to play Halo Reach and 4/5 and then go play the prequels and feel sluggish.

 

 

The Halo CE Pistol and Halo 2 BR were basicly god weapons and no other weapon other than the Sniper Rifle and Rocket launcher came close, and even they could be outdone by these two weapons. These games were unbalanced in those terms.

 

I know Halo 3 feels sluggish compared to more recent games but that doesn't mean it isn't a problem. Nowadays we're used to faster gameplay and going back to what Halo 3 was wouldn't work out that well.

[Drizzy_Dan]

I think 343 should come out with a Classic Playlist on Halo 5 for players who don't want to keep playing MCC so they can see how much they really don't want that gameplay back in this game.

[RedStarRocket91]

Let's be honest and unbiased for once guys. You CANNOT call Halo 5 a success on any level, nor can you call 343 a success and honestly say their direction is good.

 

Halo 5 is the equivalent to Colonial Marines. No other Halo game has ever shipped more incomplete and broken than Halo 5. I'd count MCC but that was not all 343, as Saber and CA are also to blame.

 

Halo 1 and 2 were in no way unbalanced. I'd like to see some actual game data facts to shlw how it isnt. Halo 3 was not any slower gameplay wise than 1 & 2. The only reason ot feels slower, as does the previous titles, is because of the increase in post Halo 3 gameplay. It is simple to play Halo Reach and 4/5 and then go play the prequels and feel sluggish.

 

I'd contest a lot of this.

 

Insofar as the Arena multiplayer side of things is concerned, I think it's perfectly fair to say Halo 5 is a success: weapons are generally very well-balanced, the map pool is generally of unremarkable but serviceable quality, the new Spartan Abilities add a lot to combat in what feels like a very natural and fluid evolution of traditional Halo gameplay, and it all comes together to give what is arguably the most well-balanced and diverse Halo multiplayer to date - and that's only going to improve as more features are added. I'm also told Warzone is very good, but given that I have no intention of playing it so long as it remains a pay-to-win gamemode funding by what I am obligated to remind everyone is a system of real-money gambling, I don't have an opinion on it.

 

In terms of no Halo shipping more incomplete - I'd argue Reach was far worse, given that the entirety of its multiplayer maps were ripped from the campaign, and the absolutely appaling quality of forge maps that were initially shipped with it (I'll never forgive Bungie for allowing the travesty that was The Cage to be shipped). And that's before we even begin to consider things like the complete lack of balance, incredibly questionable mechanical decisions like bloom and damage bleedthrough, or, to come onto how 'broken' it was, the near-total collapse of the matchmaking system in the immediate aftermath of launch.

 

As for Halo 2 being balanced - can't agree with that at all. It was a game completely dominated by the Battle Rifle, which made almost every other weapon completely redundant, as well as leading to the rise of cheap tactics like the noob combo, and that's before we even get to how completely and utterly broken it was in terms of button glitches like the BXR combo, which was never patched out and so created an artificial balance in which players were literally required to abuse exploits in order to win games. Plus, the Sniper Rifle was pathetically easy to use thanks to the way it detected hits, and the whole game stank of being a rushed and poorly organised affair despite having substantially more in the way of time and budget than its predecessor. Add to that a spattering of incredibly low-quality or recycled maps, one of the worst designed singleplayer campaign I've ever seen in a videogame, and a lack of netwrok policing making it incredibly easily exploitable, and you have a complete and utter disaster of a game which was so poor in every regard that literally its only saving grace was that there was nothing competing with it at the time, because if it had come out on PC and needed to compete with things like Quake III, it would have been laughed out of the market and dead in a month.

 

So while I respect what Bungie did, and still think Halo 3 is the crowning achievement of console gaming, I think it's unfair to say that their record with Halo was an uninterrupted series of triumphs. Let's not forget that Reach completely split the community so badly that many people were actively glad to see Bungie go. And given the direction they've since taken with Destiny, it's increasingly clear that they're no longer a studio that I'd want to be associated with Halo.

 

That said - yeah, I'm disappointed with 343i as well. For all Halo 5's multiplayer is very solid, I still dislike how much faster it's become than the older games, and I'm really disappointed by the fact that Firefight is still yet to return (PvE Warzone is a step in the right direction, but it's a fundamentally different gametype). And that's to say nothing of what a catastrophe Halo 5's campaign was, or the blatantly false advertising which led up to its release - which is all a particular shame as Halo 4 had a fantastic campaign, the kind of strong character drama which the series really needed after how flat Reach's campaign was. And of course, I'll make a criticism here not just of how low on content the game was on launch (not as bad as Reach, but still poor) and the incredibly monotonous art style, but of the business model, given that the REQ system is absolutely disgusting and a very big part of why I don't play anymore.

 

So overall? I don't know how I feel about 343i. On the one hand, between Halos 4 and 5 they've shown they have the capability to make a really good game, with a really good story and a well-balanced multiplayer, but they've also shown that they're quite capable of utterly screwing it up as well, and making shady business decisions while they're at it. I think on balance I'd say I still believe them to be the right people to be making Halo, but they aren't really far off losing my trust, and while I do intend on getting Halo 6 whenever it comes out, there's no way I'm going to be buying it on day one.

[Guts]

@@RedStarRocket91 Halo 5s Campaign did leave a lot to desire but it was definitely not a catastrophe. The story was great, the direction they are going opens up so much possibilities. The problem was that it was executed poorly i.e lore missions, two Blue Team missions, Warden boss use. Aside from that, it was great.

 

As for false advertising, that is a senseless claim. Halo 5 followed , for lack of a better word, a switcheroo marketing campaign which has been done by several other games. The point was that you would be presented with a different (but completely possible) story and then it would be changed to surprise the consumer. It doesn't spoil the story and your curiosity drives you to know the truth. False advertising doesn't come into play here.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Kakashi_Hatake