Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Do you really want Halo 5 to top CoD?

OP The Kishinev

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Is it really a good thing for us and a good thing for Halo if it's the most populated shooter on Xbox? Strictly talking multiplayer here. I think that back in the day, being the top really meant something. It meant that the game was exceptionally good. Nowadays, being the top means your game is easy to play but more importantly, easy to be good at, due to gaming becoming so mainstream. Being the top means being League of Legends or Call of Duty. We see now that there's a price to being the most played game of it's genre. It's a price that the game pays for trying to cater to everybody and everybody will suffer because of it. A game like Dark Souls could never be what it's known for today if it made compromises to its goals - Being a relentlessly difficult game that doesn't hold your hand.

I'm not saying that every game should be relentlessly hard, what I'm saying is that every game should be exactly what it wants to be, with no compromises. Then again, video games are a business, so who am I to judge a developer who just wants to make a living? In my opinion, the day that Halo becomes more played than Call of Duty (unless CoD commits suicide) is the day that Halo has lost something important that made it unique. Unique games that don't hold your hand with instant gratification are games that don't sell as well as the games that try to appeal to as many people as possible (at least in these days). There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Being the top isn't as important as you think it is. As long as we have a healthy population, why should we care about how many people play Halo compared to CoD?

A lot of us really want to see Halo take it's throne back but is it really a throne worth claiming anymore? A throne that's littered with Doritos and empty Mountain Dew bottles? A throne that asks no commitment or dedication from it's followers? Just pay your $60 for a ticket to mindless fun where everyone is a winner? Where all of what we think makes games awesome is cast aside in favor of a mediocre experience for everyone instead? A throne that the ruler is sitting upon because they managed to turn our favorite hobby into a soulless grind that begs for our hard-earned money every 5 seconds?

A small tribe made of family and friends is happier than a large country with a government sucking it's people dry. Times have changed, Halo has changed, the past will never again become the present. Start taking Halo for what it is now, not for what it used to be. Don't set the bar for success at CoD's level because then you will always see Halo as a failure.

Halo 5 won't top Call of Duty and that is part of what makes it the better game.
If Halo becomes more played than Call of Duty because it's incredibly easy, then yes, that's bad.

If it becomes more popular simply because it's a great game, then what's the problem?
If Halo 5 becomes the go-to game to play instead of CoD, I will be fine with it as long as it doesn't attract all the CoD kids. I don't want 10 year olds going 3-25 and screaming through their mic when I try to play ranked.
If Halo becomes more played than Call of Duty because it's incredibly easy, then yes, that's bad.

If it becomes more popular simply because it's a great game, then what's the problem?
True but what op is getting at is that nowadays gaming is more mainstream than it used to be. The most popular games of a genre arent popular anymore necessarily because they are great games but because they are just mindless... hmmm, "fun", that anybody can feel good about playing.
Halo is a console exclusive which means it would be extremely difficult for it to ever get a hand over CoD which has a huge following on both consoles.

Although I cherish the rivalry between the two, as it grants one many fond memories. Despite halo not being in a good place right now, look at the current top preorders. Call of Duty is the most preordered game, followed by Halo 5 guardians. Some things never change.
If Halo becomes more played than Call of Duty because it's incredibly easy, then yes, that's bad.

If it becomes more popular simply because it's a great game, then what's the problem?
True but what op is getting at is that nowadays gaming is more mainstream than it used to be. The most popular games of a genre arent popular anymore necessarily because they are great games but because they are just mindless... hmmm, "fun", that anybody can feel good about playing.
True, but mainstream doesn't necessarily mean easy. At some point in the future, near or far, the majority of gamers could come to the conclusion that easy games are boring, and if Halo becomes the most played game because of the higher amount of skill needed, that's not really a bad thing. Point being, Halo being the most played would be a great thing so long as the series is sticking to its roots.
I'm gonna go ahead and say this sounds like a lot of hipster hogwash. LoL is not "easy", CoD is not "easy". I'd love to see you play against their pros and do well. I almost guarantee you would not get one point in LoL.
If a halo game can get to the top while playing like a halo game, it will be fine by me. Halo could top call of duty, but it needs to get popular again. Halo can be liked for a lot more reasons than COD, all COD has is quick kills.

We should not set the bar at COD, we need a better game like halo to set the bar. I want as many people as possible enjoying halo
DAU Terren wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and say this sounds like a lot of hipster hogwash. LoL is not "easy", CoD is not "easy". I'd love to see you play against their pros and do well. I almost guarantee you would not get one point in LoL.
COD is fundamentally easy, anyone with decent FPS experience would be able to get a few kills on a pro due to how high the TTK is. All they have to do is sneak up and shoot them.

In a game like halo, the better player will more than likely barely get killed by the lesser player. Most very competitive games work like this. Example, CSGO has a lot of factors to take in, so a lower ranked player would stand no chance against a higher ranked players, only getting to kill them if they get lucky.

COD barely has any factors to take into consideration, so it is pretty easy if you are somewhat familiar with the game.
Do I really want to Halo to be more popular than CoD?

Jokes aside, all I really want is a thriving and creative community. It feels like the hype and creativity is gone, replaced by yearly releases of other games. That makes me sad. I remember a time when people were really dedicated to certain games, and I'd like to see Halo achieve that again.

Right now the most dedicated and creative fanbase I've taken part in is the CS:GO fanbase, and they lack some of the magic that the Halo community crafted.

Is it really a good thing for us and a good thing for Halo if it's the most populated shooter on Xbox? Strictly talking multiplayer here. I think that back in the day, being the top really meant something. It meant that the game was exceptionally good. Nowadays, being the top means your game is easy to play but more importantly, easy to be good at, due to gaming becoming so mainstream.
I mean, Dota 2, League of Legends and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive are the three most popular games on PC at the moment, and none of them are by any means easy to be good at. Quite the opposite actually. Both Dota and CS have huge, steep learning curves. I can't speak for LOL on that manner. But what CS does extremely well is make itself open to casual and competitive players alike, with incentive for casual players to play (skins) and likewise for competitive players (ranks.)

I bring up CS:GO a LOT on these forums, but it's an extremely well crafted game (for all its flaws). By no means is it perfect, but it does what it does astoundingly well.

The only example of top "Mainstream" games that I would define as "easy" are either different genres entirely, or Call of Duty. And given the amount of big CoD youtubers I've seen switching to CS:GO, I don't think CoD is going to be as big as it is now in 5 years.

Regardless, a game by no means has to be "easy" to be accepted by the masses. It just has to be fun. There has to be incentive for players of all calibers to play (and that doesn't have to come at the cost of competitive viability.)

Being the top means being League of Legends or Call of Duty. We see now that there's a price to being the most played game of it's genre. It's a price that the game pays for trying to cater to everybody and everybody will suffer because of it. A game like Dark Souls could never be what it's known for today if it made compromises to its goals - Being a relentlessly difficult game that doesn't hold your hand.
See above.

I'm not saying that every game should be relentlessly hard, what I'm saying is that every game should be exactly what it wants to be, with no compromises.
I agree wholeheartedly. However one also needs to branch out and give people options. Halo 3 wasn't the king of Console shooters simply because of the multiplayer or campaign. Forge, Theatre and especially customs made a HUGE impact in the longevity of the game, and that longevity (combined with promotion of community growth and creativity) is what needs to be sought after. Skyrim and minecraft are two great exampels of games that allow for massive amounts of creativity, and both have lasted long after most games these days would have died.

Granted both are declining, but 4-5 years each is a time respectable none-the-less.

A game should focus on its experience, however it also needs to give the community the tools to create their own, and the ability to share those creations with others.

Then again, video games are a business, so who am I to judge a developer who just wants to make a living? In my opinion, the day that Halo becomes more played than Call of Duty (unless CoD commits suicide) is the day that Halo has lost something important that made it unique. Unique games that don't hold your hand with instant gratification are games that don't sell as well as the games that try to appeal to as many people as possible (at least in these days). There's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Being the top isn't as important as you think it is. As long as we have a healthy population, why should we care about how many people play Halo compared to CoD?
I agree with your premise that attempting to appeal to the widest possible audience is only going to water down the experience overall. However, it's worth noting that the most popular games out there don't try to appeal to a wider audience. They cater to their own, and do their best to improve the experience they offer. It's entirely possible to become the most popular game without jeopardizing the soul of the series.

Start taking Halo for what it is now, not for what it used to be.
I'm just going to point out that it's ironic you say this despite everything you just said. Halo 5 is (in my honest opinion) filled with mechanics that are appealiing to a demographic that isn't Halo, which is what you claimed Halo should avoid doing.

Halo 5 won't top Call of Duty and that is part of what makes it the better game.
By that logic any game that isn't Call of Duty is a better game than Call of Duty :P
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
What is even the point of this question? Its like me asking "wouldn't it be cool if we could jump over the moon"?

Halo will NEVER pass COD. 343 is a horrible company who makes horrible decisions. They are trying to copy COD and failing at it.

I would bet my life that Halo 5 will not be more popular than COD
Are you going to purchase Halo 5? Just thought I'd ask, as it sounds like you've already made up your mind about it.

I'd go into a long rant regarding the fact that Halo 5 is significantly less like CoD than Halo 4 was, but I'll spare you the walls of text.
What is even the point of this question? Its like me asking "wouldn't it be cool if we could jump over the moon"?

Halo will NEVER pass COD. 343 is a horrible company who makes horrible decisions. They are trying to copy COD and failing at it.

I would bet my life that Halo 5 will not be more popular than COD
Haven't seen a UNSCXSniper post in a while...

"Makes horrible decisions" Ok I guess that's why the halo 5 beta did so well abd was praised by just about everyone who had an open mind.
DAU Terren wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and say this sounds like a lot of hipster hogwash. LoL is not "easy", CoD is not "easy". I'd love to see you play against their pros and do well. I almost guarantee you would not get one point in LoL.
DAU Terren wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and say this sounds like a lot of hipster hogwash. LoL is not "easy", CoD is not "easy". I'd love to see you play against their pros and do well. I almost guarantee you would not get one point in LoL.
COD is fundamentally easy, anyone with decent FPS experience would be able to get a few kills on a pro due to how high the TTK is. All they have to do is sneak up and shoot them.

In a game like halo, the better player will more than likely barely get killed by the lesser player. Most very competitive games work like this. Example, CSGO has a lot of factors to take in, so a lower ranked player would stand no chance against a higher ranked players, only getting to kill them if they get lucky.

COD barely has any factors to take into consideration, so it is pretty easy if you are somewhat familiar with the game.
The 2nd guy nailed what I was saying. No, I couldnt beat the COD pros so I guess one shouldnt say its "easy". I think what most people mean is the skill set needed to be successful in any particular match in COD is far more narrow than in Halo.
@SilentA98- I was going to quote you but it was too much and didnt want to put all of it in there. You bring up those PC games not being easy and still being popular but I think its fair to say that the PC crowd and console crowd are different beasts altogether as far as player mentalities.
DAU Terren wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and say this sounds like a lot of hipster hogwash. LoL is not "easy", CoD is not "easy". I'd love to see you play against their pros and do well. I almost guarantee you would not get one point in LoL.
DAU Terren wrote:
I'm gonna go ahead and say this sounds like a lot of hipster hogwash. LoL is not "easy", CoD is not "easy". I'd love to see you play against their pros and do well. I almost guarantee you would not get one point in LoL.
COD is fundamentally easy, anyone with decent FPS experience would be able to get a few kills on a pro due to how high the TTK is. All they have to do is sneak up and shoot them.

In a game like halo, the better player will more than likely barely get killed by the lesser player. Most very competitive games work like this. Example, CSGO has a lot of factors to take in, so a lower ranked player would stand no chance against a higher ranked players, only getting to kill them if they get lucky.

COD barely has any factors to take into consideration, so it is pretty easy if you are somewhat familiar with the game.
The 2nd guy nailed what I was saying. No, I couldnt beat the COD pros so I guess one shouldnt say its "easy". I think what most people mean is the skill set needed to be successful in any particular match in COD is far more narrow than in Halo.
Getting 1-2 kills because of a quick TTK does not mean that the game is "easy", it means it is accessible. If you have to play for 10+ hours to even be mediocre at any one game, then the burden of knowledge on the skills to play the game is ridiculous. Knowledge =/= skill. On top of that, it is a GAME, people play them to have fun. Not to get "curb stomped" by "leet" players who think they are pro with a 1.3 KD.

If a player were really "good" then they would never get snuck up on. If the player was "really good" they would be able to control a map enough that short of a coordinated bum rush, the opposing team would not be able to kill you.
As long as there is enough people playing to find matches easily it doesn't matter how popular a mp game is.
@SilentA98- I was going to quote you but it was too much and didnt want to put all of it in there. You bring up those PC games not being easy and still being popular but I think its fair to say that the PC crowd and console crowd are different beasts altogether as far as player mentalities.
For sure. You have to put a lot more money into PC gaming than into consoles, and that implies a certain level of maturatiy (money to spend) and dedication. Not that there aren't younger kids on PC games, but it's safe to say for the time being that the demographic is older overall and so has a different mentality. It's also worth noting that the people who would play for a more competitive mindset have likely jumped ship, as there's a greater influx of "skill" based titles on the PC than the consoles nowadays.

With that said though, the popularity of CoD e-sports and Halo MLG (back in the day) shows that there is a demographic willing to participate in that kind of thing on consoles. The issue is that there hasn't been a new, well developed title (ignoring titanfall and destiny, because both were killed by their own hype) that supplies that type of gameplay in a while. Even if the competitive demographic is smaller, I'd still argue that creating a game with enough of a skill curve to keep things interesting even for those willing to put in a lot of time is ideal.

Obviously we don't need Counter-Strike/Dota level of difficulty, but there still needs to be a challenge of some sort.

...

...

I'll be honest I'm not sure where I'm going with this post. I had an idea in my head of the point I wanted to make but it's since turned to rambling. Hopefully you get what I was going for though.

Pretty sure the goal was to point out that a game with competitive viability could still be top of the market, but I got distracted somewhere in the middle. Whoops. Maybe it had something to do with finding the right balance between casual/competitive like CS:GO has done or something along those lines.

I apologize, it's late and I'm tired :P
"Makes horrible decisions" Ok I guess that's why the halo 5 beta did so well abd was praised by just about everyone who had an open mind.
lol

I take it anyone who disagreed with you didn't have an open mind, right? Guess it's easier to just to come up with any old reason to call someone wrong instead of having an actual discussion with them ;)
Halo is the underdog in this case, it lives in CoDs shadow but in reality its better when there is Halo 5 and Call of Duty Recycled Warfare
What is even the point of this question? Its like me asking "wouldn't it be cool if we could jump over the moon"?

Halo will NEVER pass COD. 343 is a horrible company who makes horrible decisions. They are trying to copy COD and failing at it.

I would bet my life that Halo 5 will not be more popular than COD
Are you going to purchase Halo 5? Just thought I'd ask, as it sounds like you've already made up your mind about it.

I'd go into a long rant regarding the fact that Halo 5 is significantly less like CoD than Halo 4 was, but I'll spare you the walls of text.
I may buy it used just because I love(d) Halo but I will definitely not be buying it new so it wont go towards 343s sales.

Also, I am glad you saved me that wall of text because its so obvious 343 has been trying to copy COD since their start with halo 4 that it would be completely useless for you to even try to say otherwise. Just a short list of similarities between COD and halo added by 343: League System, Sprint, loadouts, weapon skins, ADS, care packages, perks, killstreaks, Larger maps, more one shot kill weapons, Left trigger aim, etc.

and that's ignoring their obvious dumbing down of gameplay which is a classic COD move
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2