Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Can we disable sprint, spartan abilities & clamber

OP Tr4MpMAGA

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. ...
  8. 8
Marcos94 wrote:
Honestly I really don't understand the hate for Spartan abilities. In the Beta your character felt fluid instead of like a walking tiger tank. When I go back and replay Halo Anniversary on MCC I get frustrated. It was great in its day but having used more fluid characters and controls I feel like no sprint is going back to 56k after having fiber optic service. It works but it just feels like a step back.
This. In Halo 3 you felt like a floating gun camera, not a supersoldier. IMO Spartan abilities make the gameplay so much more fluid and exciting.

I remember Halo combat evolved pushing forward shooter gameplay with lots of new features that weren't common at the time. Two weapons, regening shields, separate grenade button. Now it seems like people don't want gameplay to advance and just want it to be the same with better graphics. And then people complain that CoD never changes while complaining that Halo changed.
People complain COD never changes because a "new" one comes out every year, sometimes even more than that. And even campaign-wise, they don't follow each other. If COD came out every 3-4 years with one developer, and consistent campaign sequels, then barely anyone would complain.

Halo 3 pushed forward by adding theater, forge, file share, etc.
With that logic, what you're saying is sprint and clambering is a new feature that isn't common. And the point is: It IS common, and NOT sprinting or anything is actually really uncommon. Making it unique and different. That's why Halo 3 was addicting for most.
Common doesn't mean bad. The reason those features are in so many games is that they are seen as an improvement compared to being without them.
Marcos94 wrote:
Honestly I really don't understand the hate for Spartan abilities. In the Beta your character felt fluid instead of like a walking tiger tank. When I go back and replay Halo Anniversary on MCC I get frustrated. It was great in its day but having used more fluid characters and controls I feel like no sprint is going back to 56k after having fiber optic service. It works but it just feels like a step back.
This. In Halo 3 you felt like a floating gun camera, not a supersoldier. IMO Spartan abilities make the gameplay so much more fluid and exciting.

I remember Halo combat evolved pushing forward shooter gameplay with lots of new features that weren't common at the time. Two weapons, regening shields, separate grenade button. Now it seems like people don't want gameplay to advance and just want it to be the same with better graphics. And then people complain that CoD never changes while complaining that Halo changed.
People complain COD never changes because a "new" one comes out every year, sometimes even more than that. And even campaign-wise, they don't follow each other. If COD came out every 3-4 years with one developer, and consistent campaign sequels, then barely anyone would complain.

Halo 3 pushed forward by adding theater, forge, file share, etc.
With that logic, what you're saying is sprint and clambering is a new feature that isn't common. And the point is: It IS common, and NOT sprinting or anything is actually really uncommon. Making it unique and different. That's why Halo 3 was addicting for most.
Common doesn't mean bad. The reason those features are in so many games is that they are seen as an improvement compared to being without them.
Halo 3 was addictive because it was the only thing. Its easy to sell cocaine for 100/gram when you're the only dealer
I laugh when people use Advanced Warfare as part of their argument. It pretty makes it entirely invalid. The games were developed at the same time and 2 teams created movement systems with marginal similarities. Advanced Warfare just came out first. Similarities are irrelevant in an argument because the Halo 5 team couldn't be following a trend because there was no trend to begin with.

But I suppose if people want to keep using invalid arguments it isn't my place to judge.
I personally think 343 should have said, "Sorry, but there isn't anything here for you. This is the way Halo is.", to everyone who wanted to sprint, ADS, etc.

However, if 343 is 100% set on refusing to go back to the actual roots of Halo, then I suppose I'd suggest they not attempt to cater to the original fanbase at all, and simply say, "Sorry guys, but there's no longer anything for you here. This is the way Halo is now."

If they'd say that, the division in this community would certainly die down a lot. I would leave, as I'd have no reason to stay. It wouldn't be what I wanted, but I'd have received a clear message telling me what I wanted wasn't going to happen as long as 343 was at the helm.

While I'd 100% disagree with the direction they'd have chosen, I'd recognize they'd chosen a direction, and if they verbally communicated a message stating they have no intentions of compromising said direction, I suppose I'd actually respect them more and just put Halo behind me.
Two games isnt enough for you to put it behind you? Sprint isnt going anywhere. Neither is some sort of gameplay mechanic like SAs or AAs. So I suggest you look and see that 343 have their vision of Halo, it involves sprinting and advanced combat armor that can use equipment or abilities, and I suggest you realize it wont change to fit you.

What exactly are the actual roots of Halo? A Mac game that was ported to a 15 year old console which featured a hotkey grenade? Cause thats about all that seperates original Halo from other games. That and the fact that half the zooms on weapons are just you zooming in your visor.
Two games, one being a Halo mutation experience, another being anchored by a marketing campaign exclaiming it was "Taking Halo Back to It's Roots". SA's/AA's don't necessarily have to go anywhere, as I personally welcome thrusters. Sprint "speed" can be had without having a sprint button, simply by increasing pace of base movement. I suggest you realize I never said Halo should change to fit anybody, until it started being drastically changed from title to title seeming in efforts to fit most everybody.

The roots of Halo? The simplistic core gameplay found in any/all of the first three titles, along with unique map/level design which complements that simplistic core gameplay so well that it and the players both evolve/advance together throughout the lifespan of each respective title. The way you played H2/H3 totally changed over time, because the gameplay was simple enough that just about anyone could play it, but the maps allowed those who wanted to progress to transform into entirely different players if they were willing to spend enough time playing the game.

What appeared to be super-simple gameplay at the surface was able to become more complex and fast-paced than anything Reach or Halo 4 ever offered, simply because that simple gameplay allowed maps to be crafted so in-tune with it that they combined to enable the players more and more over time. It was simple, it was addicting, it was rewarding to anyone who cared to spend more time playing. It wasn't always easy, and sometimes it was totally unforgiving. It could be anywhere from extremely laid back, or it could be competitive as hell, all without dividing its' player base.

While in a much different way, even Halo Reach was still largely shaped by its lesser-sized community, because the developers enabled players by providing them excellent tools like forge/file-share/file-browsers, and the developer sought to reward the best community creations by implementing them into the actual game where everybody could see and play upon them.If Halo 3 had Reach's more advanced Forge/File-Share/File-Browser/Armor Customization, we'd have never seen a Reach/H4/H5 style Halo because the H3 sales numbers would have been so outrageous, M$ and Master Chief both would've pooped their armor.

Halo 6 can be a game that's true to it's roots and be better than any previous Halo title. To do so I'd suggest (off the top of my head - there's several threads that offer more):
  • Keep equal starts
  • Remove sprint
  • Increase base movement speed
  • Keep thrusters
  • Remove ADS from any/all precision weapons
  • Return SmartLink to those precision weapons
  • Add & expand upon Reach customization
  • Keep and expand REQ (I do think req has great potential)
  • Offer File-Share/Browser day one
  • Put the best community creations in the game!
  • Find a way to make a customs browser happen
  • Offer a refined 1-50 rank system
  • Re-implement clans
  • Offer a clan/team rank system that has merit in both matchmaking and co-op campaign/firefight
  • Offer an expanded EXP system that can coexist with REQ and also play a role with campaign and any firefight/spartan op modes that may come down the line
  • Return iconic weapon designs to their iconic selves
  • Launch with all historically popular playlists
  • Add several new game modes every few months (if any catch fire then congrats to 343 for adding something great to Halo)
  • Add several new weapons per title (if any catch fire then congrats to 343 for adding something great to Halo)
  • Offer different weapon designs via REQ (if any catch fire then congrats to 343 for adding something great to Halo)
  • Offer daily/weekly/monthly challenges
  • Implement daily/weekly/monthly leaderboards
  • Implement in-game bi-weekly polls (allows 343 to quickly gain feedback from those who are actually playing the game)
  • Never put a new game mode in at the expense of a pre-existing, popular one
  • Never delay a pre-existing, popular game mode in favor of a new one (see: Warzone/BTB)
I'm pretty sure they will be giving you that ability to do that
Love some of these ideas!

  • Put the best community creations in the game!
  • Find a way to make a customs browser happen
  • Offer daily/weekly/monthly challenges
  • Implement daily/weekly/monthly leaderboards
  • Implement in-game bi-weekly polls (allows 343 to quickly gain feedback from those who are actually playing the game)
Marcos94 wrote:
Just so you know, Modern Warfare "knocked out" Halo 3 out of the top chart because it was a new game, AND was considered the best CoD. I remember that. And Halo 3 didn't drop out of the top 3 charts until late 2010, when it simply got milked out of all its gameplay. And even then, it still had some pretty high populations. But that's none of my business. Lol
Halo 3 and Modern Warfare 2 were the games I played most and had insane amounts of fun. They were both different enough to change between. Now, personally, I won't have enough incentive to switch and have fun.
Yeah, Halo obviously has competition, but it was unique enough that it never had DIRECT competition. It's like saying the Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are competition. Yeah... Technically because they're both open world RPG's, but they're both super unique in their own ways. Not direct competition. People buy both.
An example of games that directly compete would be Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Battlefield, Ghost Recon... And many more. Now, yes, including Halo 4 and possibly Halo 5.

We're going around in circles here. Not going to argue about this anymore, as it's just simply opinion and we're not getting anywhere. I cancelled my pre order of Halo 5, and will wait for reviews and general opinions about it. I personally just don't trust 343i after Halo 4 and the huge MCC fail. And yes, that's a pretty rational reason for not IMMEDIATELY giving a company my $60. ;)
Deuces.
Two games, one being a Halo mutation experience, another being anchored by a marketing campaign exclaiming it was "Taking Halo Back to It's Roots". SA's/AA's don't necessarily have to go anywhere, as I personally welcome thrusters. Sprint "speed" can be had without having a sprint button, simply by increasing pace of base movement. I suggest you realize I never said Halo should change to fit anybody, until it started being drastically changed from title to title seeming in efforts to fit most everybody.

The roots of Halo? The simplistic core gameplay found in any/all of the first three titles, along with unique map/level design which complements that simplistic core gameplay so well that it and the players both evolve/advance together throughout the lifespan of each respective title. The way you played H2/H3 totally changed over time, because the gameplay was simple enough that just about anyone could play it, but the maps allowed those who wanted to progress to transform into entirely different players if they were willing to spend enough time playing the game.

What appeared to be super-simple gameplay at the surface was able to become more complex and fast-paced than anything Reach or Halo 4 ever offered, simply because that simple gameplay allowed maps to be crafted so in-tune with it that they combined to enable the players more and more over time. It was simple, it was addicting, it was rewarding to anyone who cared to spend more time playing. It wasn't always easy, and sometimes it was totally unforgiving. It could be anywhere from extremely laid back, or it could be competitive as hell, all without dividing its' player base.

While in a much different way, even Halo Reach was still largely shaped by its lesser-sized community, because the developers enabled players by providing them excellent tools like forge/file-share/file-browsers, and the developer sought to reward the best community creations by implementing them into the actual game where everybody could see and play upon them.If Halo 3 had Reach's more advanced Forge/File-Share/File-Browser/Armor Customization, we'd have never seen a Reach/H4/H5 style Halo because the H3 sales numbers would have been so outrageous, M$ and Master Chief both would've pooped their armor.

Halo 6 can be a game that's true to it's roots and be better than any previous Halo title. To do so I'd suggest (off the top of my head - there's several threads that offer more):
  • Keep equal starts
  • Remove sprint
  • Increase base movement speed
  • Keep thrusters
  • Remove ADS from any/all precision weapons
  • Return SmartLink to those precision weapons
  • Add & expand upon Reach customization
  • Keep and expand REQ (I do think req has great potential)
  • Offer File-Share/Browser day one
  • Put the best community creations in the game!
  • Find a way to make a customs browser happen
  • Offer a refined 1-50 rank system
  • Re-implement clans
  • Offer a clan/team rank system that has merit in both matchmaking and co-op campaign/firefight
  • Offer an expanded EXP system that can coexist with REQ and also play a role with campaign and any firefight/spartan op modes that may come down the line
  • Return iconic weapon designs to their iconic selves
  • Launch with all historically popular playlists
  • Add several new game modes every few months (if any catch fire then congrats to 343 for adding something great to Halo)
  • Add several new weapons per title (if any catch fire then congrats to 343 for adding something great to Halo)
  • Offer different weapon designs via REQ (if any catch fire then congrats to 343 for adding something great to Halo)
  • Offer daily/weekly/monthly challenges
  • Implement daily/weekly/monthly leaderboards
  • Implement in-game bi-weekly polls (allows 343 to quickly gain feedback from those who are actually playing the game)
  • Never put a new game mode in at the expense of a pre-existing, popular one
  • Never delay a pre-existing, popular game mode in favor of a new one (see: Warzone/BTB)
Looks awesome. Why can't 343i hire you? ;) Haha jk. Love the ideas though.
I think we should turn off sprint, clamber, thrusters, slide, bash, ground pound, mele, gernades, and bullets. That would be truly epic.
dundeeee wrote:
Love some of these ideas!
Marcos94 wrote:
Looks awesome. Why can't 343i hire you? ;) Haha jk. Love the ideas though.
Thanks. Glad y'all like them. I'm just in favor of making few changes to gameplay. I'd rather see more tools/features/content/accessibility be added into the mix, and letting the player base as a whole determine if/when/where/why/how any or all of it's used.

IMO, gameplay should be simple and go relatively unchanged, because the goal ought to be to remain true to yourself (Halo), but also increasing the players' ability to change the game themselves. The catch to this philosophy though is the developer has to take a sincere interest in what the community is doing. They actually need to become/remain involved in some ways too. This is especially true if a customs browsers is not an option. The developer needs to welcome community creations/ideas/submissions, be willing to spend time curating maps/gametypes, and not have any problem putting player-made content into "their" game.

Bungie wasn't perfect, and Reach sure as heck wasn't perfect either, but Bungie and Reach were a very good example of how strong a player-base can be if the developer simply chooses to empower the player by adding ways for them to become more intimately involved with your product, then supporting them and the product alike. I think if Bungie had made Reach much more similar to H2/H3, it probably would've been the clear-cut fan-favorite out of all Halo titles.
ArdAtak wrote:
I think we should turn off sprint, clamber, thrusters, slide, bash, ground pound, mele, gernades, and bullets. That would be truly epic.
That WOULD be epic. A game where you just run up to each other and observe each other's armor and legendary weapons. #FutureOfHalo
Maybe 343 should just make
  • BR playlist
  • Playlist that doesn't have sprint, smart scope, and climber
The everybody would be happy.
themanss22 wrote:
Maybe 343 should just make
  • BR playlist
  • Playlist that doesn't have sprint, smart scope, and climber
The everybody would be happy.
If my relatively short period of time on these forums is any indication, no one will ever be happy.
ThatClem wrote:
Considering the amount of set playlists I hope they don't dedicate an entire one to having no sprint or abilities. I have MCC if I want to play that stuff. Maybe have it come in for like a week or two but still it eats up a spot for another different and better playlist. And as for why lock playlists at a certain amount its to make sure the community isn't too split. They said that forever ago when they started it in Halo 4. They will have the main ones and mix in the other popular ones as they go. It definitely makes the game feel organic. Plus having a million different playlists eats up servers and the like and lowers the overall experience of everyone. Why should they have to explain every little detail when some of this is kind of obvious.
I personally hate any AAs or Spartan abilitys of any sort. Itruins halos identity and melds it with new features we don't need and feels like cod or titanfall
Please don't state your opinion as fact.
video proof halo 5 is nearly identical with minor diffrences to cod aw
I've seen that video and it is not representative of truth at all. Sorry to burst your bubble Mr. Cynic pants, but opinions =/= fact.
tell me how halo has a identity that can be seperated from titanfall, cod or destiny. convince me it still has its identity that 343 has shredded to a million pieces with halo 4
It never lost its identity so arguing semantics like that is pointless. A base game trait or ability does not mean its identity has been stolen. In YOUR mind it might have because that is what you have allowed it to have happened. Halo never ceased to be Halo. So much as I never cease to be me, if I decide I don't like eating jalapenos anymore, but I loved them as a child. Both are still facets of my identity, yet nothing of me was lost. So just please stop stating opinions as fact, you can have your opinions and I can have mine, but please for the sake of holy mother load of off topic discussions stop stating your opinions as facts.
im just trying to let 343 know my opinion on halo 5 as well as many others. the fact that they are going for the cod kid audience over the old longtime fans
Sometimes I'm not really sure if you guys really hate new player. How are 343 trying to bring COD kids? Do you even play different FPS game beside halo? Do you even release that not all old longtime fans want it to be the same? Look like to me (IMO) you don't want any new player playing halo. -.-
Kariyanine wrote:
themanss22 wrote:
Maybe 343 should just make
  • BR playlist
  • Playlist that doesn't have sprint, smart scope, and climber
The everybody would be happy.
If my relatively short period of time on these forums is any indication, no one will ever be happy.
So you rather have a playlist that have all this stuff then having a playlist that doesn't have it? I'm just trying help. -.-'
Marcos94 wrote:
Honestly I really don't understand the hate for Spartan abilities. In the Beta your character felt fluid instead of like a walking tiger tank. When I go back and replay Halo Anniversary on MCC I get frustrated. It was great in its day but having used more fluid characters and controls I feel like no sprint is going back to 56k after having fiber optic service. It works but it just feels like a step back.
This. In Halo 3 you felt like a floating gun camera, not a supersoldier. IMO Spartan abilities make the gameplay so much more fluid and exciting.

I remember Halo combat evolved pushing forward shooter gameplay with lots of new features that weren't common at the time. Two weapons, regening shields, separate grenade button. Now it seems like people don't want gameplay to advance and just want it to be the same with better graphics. And then people complain that CoD never changes while complaining that Halo changed.
People complain COD never changes because a "new" one comes out every year, sometimes even more than that. And even campaign-wise, they don't follow each other. If COD came out every 3-4 years with one developer, and consistent campaign sequels, then barely anyone would complain.

Halo 3 pushed forward by adding theater, forge, file share, etc.
With that logic, what you're saying is sprint and clambering is a new feature that isn't common. And the point is: It IS common, and NOT sprinting or anything is actually really uncommon. Making it unique and different. That's why Halo 3 was addicting for most.
Common doesn't mean bad. The reason those features are in so many games is that they are seen as an improvement compared to being without them.
Halo 3 was addictive because it was the only thing. Its easy to sell cocaine for 100/gram when you're the only dealer
Quote:
Halo 3 maintained a near constant population from September 2007 - (conservatively) 2009, a period in which it would have (conservatively) competed with AAA multiplayer titles such as:
  • Team Fortress 2
  • Call of Duty: Modern Warfare
  • Unreal Tournament 3
  • Tom Clancy's Rainbow 6: Vegas 2
  • Battlefield: Bad Company
  • Left 4 Dead
  • Call of Duty: World at War
  • Borderlands
  • Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
  • Left 4 Dead 2
This is not counting Singleplayer FPS' that released during this interval, games that were released briefly before Halo 3 but retained online population, games that were released on a different system, a whole slew of AA FPS games that could have whittled at Halo 3's population the way they did at Halo Reach/4, or the better part of the year 2010, where Halo 3 saw a drop off but still maintained steady population until the release of Halo: Reach.
By more elastic parameters, Reach (Sept 2010 - 2012) would have had to compete with:
  • Medal of Honor
  • Call of Duty: Black Ops
  • Crysis 2
  • Dead Island
  • Battlefield 3
  • Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
  • Syndicate
  • Call of Duty Black Ops 2
  • Medal of Honor Warfighter
This list is made in spite of the account that Reach's population was lower than 3's for the duration of it's life, and that, during the holiday 2011 season, it's population dipped extensively, never to recover it's former (below-Halo 3) glory.

By similarly liberal guidelines, Halo 4:
  • Syndicate
  • Call of Duty Black Ops 2
  • Medal of Honor Warfighter
Then it's population basically died that same year in comparison to the other two.
Marcos94 wrote:
Marcos94 wrote:
Just so you know, Modern Warfare "knocked out" Halo 3 out of the top chart because it was a new game, AND was considered the best CoD. I remember that. And Halo 3 didn't drop out of the top 3 charts until late 2010, when it simply got milked out of all its gameplay. And even then, it still had some pretty high populations. But that's none of my business. Lol
Halo 3 and Modern Warfare 2 were the games I played most and had insane amounts of fun. They were both different enough to change between. Now, personally, I won't have enough incentive to switch and have fun.
Yeah, Halo obviously has competition, but it was unique enough that it never had DIRECT competition. It's like saying the Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 are competition. Yeah... Technically because they're both open world RPG's, but they're both super unique in their own ways. Not direct competition. People buy both.
An example of games that directly compete would be Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Battlefield, Ghost Recon... And many more. Now, yes, including Halo 4 and possibly Halo 5.

We're going around in circles here. Not going to argue about this anymore, as it's just simply opinion and we're not getting anywhere. I cancelled my pre order of Halo 5, and will wait for reviews and general opinions about it. I personally just don't trust 343i after Halo 4 and the huge MCC fail. And yes, that's a pretty rational reason for not IMMEDIATELY giving a company my $60. ;)
Deuces.
Alright, thats cool. You're entitled to do whatever you want. But if Fallout 4 and Witcher can be classed as two seperate RPGs, then everything you mentioned fits in a different category. Call of Duty/Medal of Honor is one category. Battlefield is one category, Ghost Recon is one category, Halo 4/5 is one category. That direct competition you were mentioning is gone? It was still present. It didnt need direct competition. It was the only game for a long time, where people could shoot stuff, while playing as a human being. Some people dont like Sci-Fi. But it didnt matter, because Halo was the only console shooter that was big enough to have a lot of friends playing with you. And along came CoD. CoD is Halo's direct competition.
L377UC3 wrote:
Marcos94 wrote:
Honestly I really don't understand the hate for Spartan abilities. In the Beta your character felt fluid instead of like a walking tiger tank. When I go back and replay Halo Anniversary on MCC I get frustrated. It was great in its day but having used more fluid characters and controls I feel like no sprint is going back to 56k after having fiber optic service. It works but it just feels like a step back.
This. In Halo 3 you felt like a floating gun camera, not a supersoldier. IMO Spartan abilities make the gameplay so much more fluid and exciting.

I remember Halo combat evolved pushing forward shooter gameplay with lots of new features that weren't common at the time. Two weapons, regening shields, separate grenade button. Now it seems like people don't want gameplay to advance and just want it to be the same with better graphics. And then people complain that CoD never changes while complaining that Halo changed.
People complain COD never changes because a "new" one comes out every year, sometimes even more than that. And even campaign-wise, they don't follow each other. If COD came out every 3-4 years with one developer, and consistent campaign sequels, then barely anyone would complain.

Halo 3 pushed forward by adding theater, forge, file share, etc.
With that logic, what you're saying is sprint and clambering is a new feature that isn't common. And the point is: It IS common, and NOT sprinting or anything is actually really uncommon. Making it unique and different. That's why Halo 3 was addicting for most.
Common doesn't mean bad. The reason those features are in so many games is that they are seen as an improvement compared to being without them.
Halo 3 was addictive because it was the only thing. Its easy to sell cocaine for 100/gram when you're the only dealer
Quote:
Halo 3 maintained a near constant population from September 2007 - (conservatively) 2009, a period in which it would have (conservatively) competed with AAA multiplayer titles such as:
  • Team Fortress 2
  • Call of Duty: Modern Warfare
  • Unreal Tournament 3
  • Tom Clancy's Rainbow 6: Vegas 2
  • Battlefield: Bad Company
  • Left 4 Dead
  • Call of Duty: World at War
  • Borderlands
  • Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
  • Left 4 Dead 2
This is not counting Singleplayer FPS' that released during this interval, games that were released briefly before Halo 3 but retained online population, games that were released on a different system, a whole slew of AA FPS games that could have whittled at Halo 3's population the way they did at Halo Reach/4, or the better part of the year 2010, where Halo 3 saw a drop off but still maintained steady population until the release of Halo: Reach.
By more elastic parameters, Reach (Sept 2010 - 2012) would have had to compete with:
  • Medal of Honor
  • Call of Duty: Black Ops
  • Crysis 2
  • Dead Island
  • Battlefield 3
  • Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
  • Syndicate
  • Call of Duty Black Ops 2
  • Medal of Honor Warfighter
This list is made in spite of the account that Reach's population was lower than 3's for the duration of it's life, and that, during the holiday 2011 season, it's population dipped extensively, never to recover it's former (below-Halo 3) glory.

By similarly liberal guidelines, Halo 4:
  • Syndicate
  • Call of Duty Black Ops 2
  • Medal of Honor Warfighter
  • Mass Effect 3
  • Far Cry 3
  • Borderlands 2
  • Max Payne 3
  • Ghost Recon: Future Soldier
Then it's population basically died that same year in comparison to the other two.
And how does this take into account that Halo 3 was the defacto FPS game for the beginning of the 360 life cycle, and came bundled with half of the 360's? For the first couple of years on Xbox 360, Halo was the main shooter. CoD only dethroned that with MW2, which coincides with when CoD gained most of its mass market appeal. Holiday 2012, when Reach's numbers dropped, also happens to coincide with when Black Ops 1 was released. A game which broke CoD sales records, and also happened to feature the first (of many) Xbox 360 exclusive deals. Notice how Halo 3 does not actually have much competition? It really doesnt, as a majority of those games are not big enough to be competitors, in terms of sales (which equals game population). Halo 4 actually had the worst amount of competition. And the worst part of that is, all that competition occured at the same time as Halo 4. Not after as is the case with Halo 3 and some of the Reach games.

I italicized games which are too niche on the Xbox 360 because A) They are bigger on PC or meant for PC or B) They didnt sell well enough to be a huge competitor. I only left Left4 Dead not italicized because it was an exclusive, but even then, its largely a PC game

I dont think you guys understand that Halo has, never been, and will never be again, the king of shooters.

Gamers dont play games because of gameplay. We all argue about it here, but we didnt pick up the first Halo game because it had a hotkey grenade and shields. We picked it up because it was fun to be a Space Marine, killing Covies and Flood, and being a general badass. We may have picked up the sequels because we liked how the game plays, but its still also because we liked being a kick -Yoink- space marine. Gameplay wise, for the general gamer, doesnt add up for sports games, racing games, or even puzzle games. The general gamer plays games to get experiences they could otherwise never get. Playing 2K13 against friends was fun, but not nearly as fun as playing outside. Playing MyCareer is a different story, as I got to go from Rookie to All Star in a few seasons. I could go drive a car in real life. Or I can pay $400 for a new console, and $60 for a new game, and drive a McLaren P1 around the city of Prague. People played Halo because it was the defacto shooter for about a decade. When a new game, one with more realism, more immersion, and many more things to relate to, its obvious that Halo started losing population. Once other games came out, sequels to all the other games that were released the same year that Halo 3 came out, its a testament to the series that it has survived this long.

Its a Space Marine game where you cant sprint, aim half your weapons, and you cant jump onto a ledge if your pinky toe is below the ledge.

That game doesnt sell to the general masses. The reason Halo has survived is because it is THAT good. And it remains that good. But MS only has room for one niche shooter in its portfolio of AAA games, and that game is Gears. Halo needs to be something that is accessible to the entire gamer community, something that is seriously lacking in Halo for a long time. Its terrible to try and break into online. If you have no idea what you are doing, doesnt matter if its social or ranked, you get wrecked. Halo started losing popularity due to a number of things. Copying some of the trends of popular games is a decent place to start to try and bring your game back to form. For all the Halo fans on here that hated sprint, there must have been 12 per fan of a general consumer who said "Finally!".

What we need to ask ourselves is if we would rather see Halo be a stylized modern Halo, or fade away for the select few. Because that is the impasse we are at.
Hey ramir3z77 so do you like halo 5 or not i cant tell, i see you defending it than hating it.
I like and dislike different aspects of the game.
i never knew that
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. ...
  8. 8