Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Quite Frankly, I Like Armor Abilities

OP Kalyx triaD

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. ...
  9. 11
Four posts in a row? Use the edit button! Is there for a reason mate! 🙃

I do agree with the message though. Modernization didn't worked out, so it's time to get back to the roots and try something new! Rainbow Six and CoD showed that it can do wonders!
Heyhou117 wrote:
Just curious what Halo game you started with? And since you are just talking about custom games why not just play H4? Why does Infinite need them when it’s one of the reasons the last few games have suffered in terms of population. Look at the bigger picture in terms of what people want.

90% (I’m being generous) of players don’t want these abilities and mechanics to make a return. These features are one of the sole reasons why Halo is currently dead. The basis of Halo is equal starts, with armour abilities and loadouts the core of Halo is completely stripped away. If you look at the longevity of the Halo games the ones without these mechanics lasted the longest and were the most popular.

Btw I played a lot of H4 but that game was just Microsoft’s version of CoD
So apparently evolution is one of the reasons why Halo is dead, huh? If you hate evolution so much, why don’t you just play Halo 2 or Halo 3? The reasons as to why Halo is dead is because 1. Competition and 2. Halo 3 fanboys who hate evolution.

If Halo stayed the same as it was in 2007, then it would’ve been dead a long time ago
"If Halo stayed the same as it was in 2007, then it would’ve been dead a long time ago"

This guy is a genius. If halo stayed like halo3 it would completely dead nobody apart from the h3 fan boys like the super slow mechanics of classic halo
Finally!!!! Someone who also understands that Halo has to keep up with Cod and it’s other competitors with advanced movement
Halo didn’t have to keep up with CoD back then because it was its own game that outshined it. Halo brought in elements from CoD in Reach and extrapolated it in H4. The saying goes don’t fix what isn’t broken. If your telling me the hundreds of thousands of players coming from H3 in 2010 (3 years after the game has come out) would have just suddenly vanished if Reach didn’t have sprint, bloom or AAs your delusional. The population has dropped at a faster rate since the addition of these features stemming from Reach. There’s no other explanation, if you have one I’d love to hear it. And it’s not competition as HR, H4 and H5 had well over a million players at launch but the games weren’t good enough to keep people playing for that same period of time that the older games managed to accomplish.
No, I’m not telling you that the population would vanish in 2010 if Reach didn’t add the things you listed. It would though in 2012 or 2015 if they didn’t add any new mechanics. However, between 2007-2010, CoD was catching up pretty fast in terms of both sales and popularity, so it’d make sense if Halo added some new stuff to keep up with the the modern shooters with advanced movement. But tbh, they shouldn’t have added some stuff, like Bloom and certain abilities like Armor Lock. They weren’t fixing anything, they were just adapting to other games so they don’t feel ancient

About the competition thing, Halo games usually release weeks or months before the newest CoD game is released. During Halo 3’s lifespan, CoD was just on the rise, with MW, WaW, and MW2 being released in its prime years. Reach had peak CoD in the forms of Bo1 and MW3 as competition during it’s lifespan, as well as Battlefield 3 serving as competition for CoD. Halo 4 had Bo2, Ghosts, Advanced Warfare, and Battlefield 4. Halo 5 had every CoD since Bo3, Apex Legends, Fortnite, Battlefield 1 and 5, Overwatch, and countless other games

As you can see, Halo has been having a lot of competitors since Reach. But I do admit, the popularity of Halo has been going down slowly since then. However, part of the reason is the people aren’t willing to adapt to change. I’m not talking about you, I’m addressing a huge chunk of the community. And for those who are reading this other than Demoralisor, you know who you are.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not bump.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not bump.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not bump.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
I just don't understand why after 10 years (Reach in 2010) people are so against Halo returning to its roots for H6 (2020). The last 10 years obsviously haven't worked out as intended (even 343 has acknowledged this with H4, MCC and the decreased popularity of H5). Just give it a shot. It can't possibly fair worse. The orignal Halo fans will come back and the newer ones that have picked up the game can try the old style. Older players have been playing this new style for 10 years now, so can't we do a switch? I don't see Halo losing players for going back to the tried and true formula. Even if some people don't like it and decided to go play CoD or another similar game the old Halo players coming back would well and truely make up for it (but like I said previously Halo fans are Halo fans, they will buy the game regardless and I don't see many leaving). Even if you look at CoD, they are going back to their roots this year as they too have fallen in a slump like Halo has.
The last time CoD went back to their roots didn’t do as well as people though. Thing is that not many newer players would like the old gameplay, except for those who have played the older games and know the feel of playing it (like me.) From a business point of view, 343 will want to attract both older and newer players. So why not find a middle ground for old and new?
How is that going to look like though? If we use any form of AMM (even if it's ""just"" something basic like sprint or climb) the classic fans won't be happy at all, because that's not Halo for us. At the same time the H5G crowed is going to want more than just the simplest advanced movement mechanics and will be angry if everything get chopped off. If you compromise barely anyone will be happy imho, and a separate game mode for one or the other can't work either because of weapon balancing and overall development resources for maps and modes. So what is your solution exactly? Because I ain't seeing any!

PS.: and again, there is an edit button guys. Posting multiple times in a row is not just against the rules, it's also really, really annoying. The tread is getting longer and longer for no reason and discussion points are getting lost. The function is there, use it!
advanced movement mechanics don't make a game successful. i think it more likely leeds for it to being less successfull (lower playerbase, faster decline)

why wasn't titanfall successfull? it had very advanced movement mechanics and it played really well.

i also think games are making a mistake by trying to follow a market leader. you will never beat the leader, bc people are acustomed to this one brand. instead of catching up, halo is risking to lose it's own identity by trying to follow. also: why should people want to switch, if it's just more of the same they already have with another game? of course they will stick with the original one, bc thats the one they know and thats likely the one where their friends will be. at the same time you alienate existing fans.
we just have to look at all those "successfull" games which tried to emulate CoD which are still very "successfull". a small new spin on an exsiting game doesn't make it different enough for people to switch franchise or even try it for an extended periode. h5 felt to me like a CoD spinnoff with more health in the form of shields and i actually think that mostly the name kept it alive. (bc halo -> more players buying bc of legacy from the start -> only new and functioning halo on xb1 until 2018)

thing is: theres nothing wrong in liking one way or the other more, but you won't catch up to a market leader by just following
the problem for halo is: you now have two fan bases, which are not compatible and at one point (probably already H:I) 343 has to decide (of course there are people who like both ways, but the mechanics are still to different)
I just don't understand why after 10 years (Reach in 2010) people are so against Halo returning to its roots for H6 (2020). The last 10 years obsviously haven't worked out as intended (even 343 has acknowledged this with H4, MCC and the decreased popularity of H5). Just give it a shot. It can't possibly fair worse. The orignal Halo fans will come back and the newer ones that have picked up the game can try the old style. Older players have been playing this new style for 10 years now, so can't we do a switch? I don't see Halo losing players for going back to the tried and true formula. Even if some people don't like it and decided to go play CoD or another similar game the old Halo players coming back would well and truely make up for it (but like I said previously Halo fans are Halo fans, they will buy the game regardless and I don't see many leaving). Even if you look at CoD, they are going back to their roots this year as they too have fallen in a slump like Halo has.
The last time CoD went back to their roots didn’t do as well as people though. Thing is that not many newer players would like the old gameplay, except for those who have played the older games and know the feel of playing it (like me.) From a business point of view, 343 will want to attract both older and newer players. So why not find a middle ground for old and new?
Not sure where your getting your information from, but COD WW2 did incredibly well!! A simple Google search will tell you how well it has done. LinkNot only has it sold super well, it sold twice as fast as advanced warfare. A game that has "advance moment" Link 2Halo has every reason to go back to a more simplistic move style. Not only do sales numbers in there series show that "advance moment" hasn't done as well, but new games such as Overwatch and Doom that have little or no advance moment have sold incredibly well.

So from a business point of view, 343I/Microsoft have EVERY reason to "go back to Halo's roots" as they have lots information out there that show if done properly, the majority of people seem to like those types of games better then games with "advanced movement"

I've said this lots of times. As Long as the game is fun, people don't care what mechanics are in the game.
So apparently evolution is one of the reasons why Halo is dead, huh? If you hate evolution so much, why don’t you just play Halo 2 or Halo 3?
Are you implying that Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn't
evolve? There was a game before that too.
I didn’t say that Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn’t evolve. In fact, I actually think that both games were improvements on Halo CE
So if you can acknowledge that Halo 2 and Halo 3 were "evolutions," why would you assume the previous guy hates all evolution simply because he doesn't like these current mechanics? If he did, he would have hated every Halo after Halo CE.

You think him making a game closer to Halo 3 would be dead and boring, but you're asking to do the exact same thing with Halo Reach - for multiple games.

By its very nature, evolution isn't set in stone and there is no one way to "evolve". You could always make a game that isn't like one that isn't just going back to another.

It's always strange to see people say that "Halo needs advanced movement", when not only was it successful enough before it, it's given both players and developers more headaches than it solved.
Bro movement in the original trilogy were similar. I said that what Halo 2 and 3 added improved the gameplay

You do realize that all of the most popular games, such as Cod, Apex Legends, Fortnite, Battlefield, and others have advanced movement, so it’s make sense for Halo to have somewhat advanced movement. The reason why I said that future games should have Reach-like gameplay is that it was a mix of new and old, the game had the feel of older games, while adding new stuff like Armor Abilities. That way, old and new players would enjoy Halo more than if 343i went for the classic gameplay and neglect the newer audience or the other way around.

If Halo 3 was released in 2019, then it’d fail, because of the slow movement, which is what it’s competitors had back in the day. It might’ve been great for its time (and it still is,) but when you compare it to other games in today’s market, it looks unappealing for the average gamer.

I’m not saying that Halo must “evolve.” I’m just saying that Halo has to be at a decent pace when compared to its competitors if it wants to be popular again, and maybe add new things that people might like.
Just because a bunch of other games have X mechanic doesn't mean that other games need to follow suit to be successful. Otherwise Halo should be jumping on that Battle Royale trend right about now.

There are two successful games out there without the ability to jump.

People disliked a bunch of stuff in Halo: Reach as well. Many of the things people dislike in Halo 4 and 5 originated from Halo Reach in the first place. If Reach was released in 2019, how would it fare any better than Halo 3?
I didn’t say anything about jumping onto a trend. I said that Halo has to be at a decent rate between its competitors, or else it would be dead.

If Reach was released in 2019, it’d fair out better than Halo 3 if released in 2019 because the story would be better than every piece of trash made so far in 2019 and because the gameplay feels up to date with its competitors. There’s a reason why newcomers to Halo enjoy Halo 5’s gameplay, and that’s because it’s up to date and it feels smooth.

About people disliking things in Halo Reach, a lot of people actually liked the changes made in the game, which were then implemented into Halo 4 and 5. Hence why the community is so split nowadays
That’s so not true....H3 was huge and like I said Reach fed off of that success. Truth be told Halo fans are passionate, they really don’t care what’s other games are out. It could be a great year of gaming and if a Halo game comes out they will buy it regardless.
And considering Halo 3 is the most popular halo game at the moment (yep a 2007 game) I dont understand why u think Reach would fair better.
Because a huge part of the community are nostalgic losers (not talking about you though.)
Nostalgic Losers? I feel a gravity ban hammer coming.

I think instead of being nostalgic, it's more like Halo fans are Halo fans because of how different it is. It isn't your typical FPS and it doesn't need to follow typical FPS trends. First off, the recharging energy shield is unique to Halo and if you're going to have that, you may as well have everything else feel just as uniuqe. Especially in how you move. I never liked sprint in Halo because it didn't used to be a fast pace shooter.

The fact it takes so many shots means you need accuracy and back when Halo was truely competative, none of the pro's had their sensativity cranked to 11. 2-3 was your typical sensativity setting because accuracy was far more important that who started shooting first. Balanced map designs with power positions and power weapon spawns were key. Map control was one of the most important factors to victory, just running and gunning. To play Halo at a high level, you needed to know the intricacies of the map and how to move through it. Halo combat is about the fine details. If Call of Duty is beer, Halo is a fine whiskey.
Four posts in a row? Use the edit button! Is there for a reason mate! 🙃

I do agree with the message though. Modernization didn't worked out, so it's time to get back to the roots and try something new! Rainbow Six and CoD showed that it can do wonders!
Halo doesn’t necessarily need modernization. It needs to retain the same feel of Halo, while also adding modern mechanics used in almost every popular game, mainly sprint
absolutely not what halo needs
I don't know why people say Halo NEEDS advanced movement or even armor abilities to be successful. It never did. Part of what made Halo great was how it DIDN'T chase the market trends. Once they went that route, it was never the same.
Armor abilities would have been great for war zone. Sad thing is custom games are gonna get really boring and stale without armor abilities. They just simply added all sorts of ways to interact with.
Armor lock for the win! LOLZ
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not purposely bypass the word filter.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
Heyhou117 wrote:
Just curious what Halo game you started with? And since you are just talking about custom games why not just play H4? Why does Infinite need them when it’s one of the reasons the last few games have suffered in terms of population. Look at the bigger picture in terms of what people want.

90% (I’m being generous) of players don’t want these abilities and mechanics to make a return. These features are one of the sole reasons why Halo is currently dead. The basis of Halo is equal starts, with armour abilities and loadouts the core of Halo is completely stripped away. If you look at the longevity of the Halo games the ones without these mechanics lasted the longest and were the most popular.

Btw I played a lot of H4 but that game was just Microsoft’s version of CoD
So apparently evolution is one of the reasons why Halo is dead, huh? If you hate evolution so much, why don’t you just play Halo 2 or Halo 3? The reasons as to why Halo is dead is because 1. Competition and 2. Halo 3 fanboys who hate evolution.

If Halo stayed the same as it was in 2007, then it would’ve been dead a long time ago
"If Halo stayed the same as it was in 2007, then it would’ve been dead a long time ago"

This guy is a genius. If halo stayed like halo3 it would completely dead nobody apart from the h3 fan boys like the super slow mechanics of classic halo
Finally!!!! Someone who also understands that Halo has to keep up with Cod and it’s other competitors with advanced movement
Halo didn’t have to keep up with CoD back then because it was its own game that outshined it. Halo brought in elements from CoD in Reach and extrapolated it in H4. The saying goes don’t fix what isn’t broken. If your telling me the hundreds of thousands of players coming from H3 in 2010 (3 years after the game has come out) would have just suddenly vanished if Reach didn’t have sprint, bloom or AAs I don't know what to say. The population has dropped at a faster rate since the addition of these features stemming from Reach. There’s no other explanation, if you have one I’d love to hear it. And it’s not competition as HR, H4 and H5 had well over a million players at launch but the games weren’t good enough to keep people playing for that same period of time that the older games managed to accomplish.
Well I think the way Halo Reach and Halo 4 treated CoD are two different approaches and shows the different design philosophies between the two studios. So take the most common element behind Armor abilities, Loadouts.

So a loadout is a preset kit (weapons/grenade/equipment/abilities) that players spawn with instead of a default (and often weak) set before they go in search of better weaponry or equipment. It is more common in class style shooters like battlefield and essentially that was how it was treated mostly in multiplayer. The difference Reach had is instead of having an inventory locked to a specific class the inventory of the loadout was set by the game mode. That is probably the most unique use of a loadout that I don't see with many other shooters that use a loadout system.

Now H4 instead of having the gametype set the loadouts players then customized their loadouts using an unlock systems part of the progression. A common system but it often has the problem where players can figure out which is the strongest set up and soon there is only one type of loadout to be used and that is the optimal loadout. Now you could say playstyle would require the player to tailor the loadout but in general players will still find which weapon/perk combo is the best and copy that.

Still clearly in one game there was an adaptation of a certain game system while the other was a straight up copy.
stukes09 wrote:
So apparently evolution is one of the reasons why Halo is dead, huh? If you hate evolution so much, why don’t you just play Halo 2 or Halo 3?
Are you implying that Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn't
evolve? There was a game before that too.
I didn’t say that Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn’t evolve. In fact, I actually think that both games were improvements on Halo CE
So if you can acknowledge that Halo 2 and Halo 3 were "evolutions," why would you assume the previous guy hates all evolution simply because he doesn't like these current mechanics? If he did, he would have hated every Halo after Halo CE.

You think him making a game closer to Halo 3 would be dead and boring, but you're asking to do the exact same thing with Halo Reach - for multiple games.

By its very nature, evolution isn't set in stone and there is no one way to "evolve". You could always make a game that isn't like one that isn't just going back to another.

It's always strange to see people say that "Halo needs advanced movement", when not only was it successful enough before it, it's given both players and developers more headaches than it solved.
Bro movement in the original trilogy were similar. I said that what Halo 2 and 3 added improved the gameplay

You do realize that all of the most popular games, such as Cod, Apex Legends, Fortnite, Battlefield, and others have advanced movement, so it’s make sense for Halo to have somewhat advanced movement. The reason why I said that future games should have Reach-like gameplay is that it was a mix of new and old, the game had the feel of older games, while adding new stuff like Armor Abilities. That way, old and new players would enjoy Halo more than if 343i went for the classic gameplay and neglect the newer audience or the other way around.

If Halo 3 was released in 2019, then it’d fail, because of the slow movement, which is what it’s competitors had back in the day. It might’ve been great for its time (and it still is,) but when you compare it to other games in today’s market, it looks unappealing for the average gamer.

I’m not saying that Halo must “evolve.” I’m just saying that Halo has to be at a decent pace when compared to its competitors if it wants to be popular again, and maybe add new things that people might like.
Just because a bunch of other games have X mechanic doesn't mean that other games need to follow suit to be successful. Otherwise Halo should be jumping on that Battle Royale trend right about now.

There are two successful games out there without the ability to jump.

People disliked a bunch of stuff in Halo: Reach as well. Many of the things people dislike in Halo 4 and 5 originated from Halo Reach in the first place. If Reach was released in 2019, how would it fare any better than Halo 3?
I didn’t say anything about jumping onto a trend. I said that Halo has to be at a decent rate between its competitors, or else it would be dead.

If Reach was released in 2019, it’d fair out better than Halo 3 if released in 2019 because the story would be better than every piece of trash made so far in 2019 and because the gameplay feels up to date with its competitors. There’s a reason why newcomers to Halo enjoy Halo 5’s gameplay, and that’s because it’s up to date and it feels smooth.

About people disliking things in Halo Reach, a lot of people actually liked the changes made in the game, which were then implemented into Halo 4 and 5. Hence why the community is so split nowadays
That’s so not true....H3 was huge and like I said Reach fed off of that success. Truth be told Halo fans are passionate, they really don’t care what’s other games are out. It could be a great year of gaming and if a Halo game comes out they will buy it regardless.
And considering Halo 3 is the most popular halo game at the moment (yep a 2007 game) I dont understand why u think Reach would fair better.
What do you mean it's the most popular? H3 has more active players than H5? I find that very hard to believe. It's dogsh*t to look at, for starters. I can't play a game with graphics that horrendous.
Yes it does, by a considerable margin too. Even 343 have been supporting H3 more than H5 for the past year if you didn’t know. H5 is no longer the featured competitive title, it’s been H3 for almost a year now I believe.

Also I like to think H3 has best art style by a landslide. H4s is easily the worst in the series being so dull and H5s looks alright but I don’t think it gives off that Halo vibe. So don’t know what your on about?
The preset loadouts in Reach were so far the best way to handle AA's. Even though I wasn't a big fan of them using different guns for each. Could you imagine H5's starting Pistol and AR with any Reach AA? I think that would be fun. Once the spawning weapons are tweeked were most people function well with them just adding choice AA's on spawn and some swapable ons on the map would be a blast.
Battle wrote:
The preset loadouts in Reach were so far the best way to handle AA's. Even though I wasn't a big fan of them using different guns for each. Could you imagine H5's starting Pistol and AR with any Reach AA? I think that would be fun. Once the spawning weapons are tweeked were most people function well with them just adding choice AA's on spawn and some swapable ons on the map would be a blast.
Imho starts without anything besides two basic weapons and a frag is the way to go. At least in 4v4 TDM or classic slayer! Loadouts are more of team strategy based modes, meaning something like firefight, Invasion or Warzone. However slayer modes in my opinion are better with equal starts and equipment on the map (in this case AA) that you got conquer!

Having to fight for the equipment also makes map design a more interesting endeavour. Think about areas that can only be reached or at least cut short by specific AAs, however you got to earn them first on completely different points on the map for instance! Those map positions also might be dangerous for the player to reach for the sake of balancing: maybe the PW is on an open space making you an easy target, or it may be surrounded by lava, meaning your landing must be perfect to get the goodie! Or maybe the PW is placed on a high spot of some machinery, but other player can activate it from below and kill the enemy player by doing so. Just to drop some ideas! And anything like this would be well integrated if player could just choose the loadout from the get go.

...not to mention weapons should be different based on the AA in any case, because some gun+ability combos are just too strong to spawn with. Let's not forget that disaster that was H4 my Halo comrades! Yes, I am watching Chernobyl right now!^^
Battle wrote:
The preset loadouts in Reach were so far the best way to handle AA's. Even though I wasn't a big fan of them using different guns for each. Could you imagine H5's starting Pistol and AR with any Reach AA? I think that would be fun. Once the spawning weapons are tweeked were most people function well with them just adding choice AA's on spawn and some swapable ons on the map would be a blast.
Imho starts without anything besides two basic weapons and a frag is the way to go. At least in 4v4 TDM or classic slayer! Loadouts are more of team strategy based modes, meaning something like firefight, Invasion or Warzone. However slayer modes in my opinion are better with equal starts and equipment on the map (in this case AA) that you got conquer!

Having to fight for the equipment also makes map design a more interesting endeavour. Think about areas that can only be reached or at least cut short by specific AAs, however you got to earn them first on completely different points on the map for instance! Those map positions also might be dangerous for the player to reach for the sake of balancing: maybe the PW is on an open space making you an easy target, or it may be surrounded by lava, meaning your landing must be perfect to get the goodie! Or maybe the PW is placed on a high spot of some machinery, but other player can activate it from below and kill the enemy player by doing so. Just to drop some ideas! And anything like this would be well integrated if player could just choose the loadout from the get go.

...not to mention weapons should be different based on the AA in any case, because some gun+ability combos are just too strong to spawn with. Let's not forget that disaster that was H4 my Halo comrades! Yes, I am watching Chernobyl right now!^^
I agree, I think that loadouts in the competative ultimately end up with people taking the BR, DMR, and a pistol. You may as well just start players with these weapons and remove loadouts all together becuase the pvp, the AR is a last resort for most people. I also like the idea of enviromental dangers surrounding the PW's.
stukes09 wrote:
So apparently evolution is one of the reasons why Halo is dead, huh? If you hate evolution so much, why don’t you just play Halo 2 or Halo 3?
Are you implying that Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn't
evolve? There was a game before that too.
I didn’t say that Halo 2 and Halo 3 didn’t evolve. In fact, I actually think that both games were improvements on Halo CE
So if you can acknowledge that Halo 2 and Halo 3 were "evolutions," why would you assume the previous guy hates all evolution simply because he doesn't like these current mechanics? If he did, he would have hated every Halo after Halo CE.

You think him making a game closer to Halo 3 would be dead and boring, but you're asking to do the exact same thing with Halo Reach - for multiple games.

By its very nature, evolution isn't set in stone and there is no one way to "evolve". You could always make a game that isn't like one that isn't just going back to another.

It's always strange to see people say that "Halo needs advanced movement", when not only was it successful enough before it, it's given both players and developers more headaches than it solved.
Bro movement in the original trilogy were similar. I said that what Halo 2 and 3 added improved the gameplay

You do realize that all of the most popular games, such as Cod, Apex Legends, Fortnite, Battlefield, and others have advanced movement, so it’s make sense for Halo to have somewhat advanced movement. The reason why I said that future games should have Reach-like gameplay is that it was a mix of new and old, the game had the feel of older games, while adding new stuff like Armor Abilities. That way, old and new players would enjoy Halo more than if 343i went for the classic gameplay and neglect the newer audience or the other way around.

If Halo 3 was released in 2019, then it’d fail, because of the slow movement, which is what it’s competitors had back in the day. It might’ve been great for its time (and it still is,) but when you compare it to other games in today’s market, it looks unappealing for the average gamer.

I’m not saying that Halo must “evolve.” I’m just saying that Halo has to be at a decent pace when compared to its competitors if it wants to be popular again, and maybe add new things that people might like.
Just because a bunch of other games have X mechanic doesn't mean that other games need to follow suit to be successful. Otherwise Halo should be jumping on that Battle Royale trend right about now.

There are two successful games out there without the ability to jump.

People disliked a bunch of stuff in Halo: Reach as well. Many of the things people dislike in Halo 4 and 5 originated from Halo Reach in the first place. If Reach was released in 2019, how would it fare any better than Halo 3?
I didn’t say anything about jumping onto a trend. I said that Halo has to be at a decent rate between its competitors, or else it would be dead.

If Reach was released in 2019, it’d fair out better than Halo 3 if released in 2019 because the story would be better than every piece of trash made so far in 2019 and because the gameplay feels up to date with its competitors. There’s a reason why newcomers to Halo enjoy Halo 5’s gameplay, and that’s because it’s up to date and it feels smooth.

About people disliking things in Halo Reach, a lot of people actually liked the changes made in the game, which were then implemented into Halo 4 and 5. Hence why the community is so split nowadays
That’s so not true....H3 was huge and like I said Reach fed off of that success. Truth be told Halo fans are passionate, they really don’t care what’s other games are out. It could be a great year of gaming and if a Halo game comes out they will buy it regardless.
And considering Halo 3 is the most popular halo game at the moment (yep a 2007 game) I dont understand why u think Reach would fair better.
What do you mean it's the most popular? H3 has more active players than H5? I find that very hard to believe. It's dogsh*t to look at, for starters. I can't play a game with graphics that horrendous.
Yes it does, by a considerable margin too. Even 343 have been supporting H3 more than H5 for the past year if you didn’t know. H5 is no longer the featured competitive title, it’s been H3 for almost a year now I believe.

Also H3 has the best art style by a landslide. H4s is the worst in the series being so dull and H5s looks alright but the art style just doesn’t look as real as H3s and doesn’t give off that Halo vibe. So don’t know what your on about?
Wow. That is unreal. Who knew. How do you know that this is true? Where are the stats that I can see ? I am really curious about this now. How old is H3?
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. ...
  9. 11