Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Halo 5 is the final nail in the coffin

OP Litty Critties

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 15
  4. 16
  5. 17
  6. 18
  7. 19
  8. ...
  9. 43
cjpinto wrote:
Last time I checked the game got 80 something on meta critic. How is that a low review? If you don't like it cool, aside from some aiming issues the game is perfect. Imho
Its not but its the lowest out of all 5 heck halo 4 got better reviews and I didnt like it I thought this one was better
Low reviews by journalists and customers alike already, the campaign being very underwhelming and a total bait and switch from what you guys advertised before release, the multiplayer still looking like and feeling like and playing like a combination of CoD and Battlefield, REQ packs to nickel and dime the modern casual playerbase, and releasing a game with less content at launch.

I'm sorry but this game doesn't scream being a natural progression from Halo 2/3 at all. The multiplayer gameplay shows it, the elementary writing and story shows it, and the removal and delay of so much other features that became staples in Halo 2 and 3 shows it. With the next CoD and Fallout just on the horizon I expect Halo 5 to turn out like Halo 4 all over again.

3 botched launches of Halo games. I think it's time someone else takes the helm of Halo development because you guys aren't listening to the classic Halo fans and you guys can't seem to bring back the game to its roots when it was at its peak during Halo 3.
Dont like it?
1.Sell your copy
2.put down your controller
3.get off the forums
4.go play another game

nuff said.
thats not enough said. say more. tell me how you'd feel fine about losing money on a game you thought would be fun like the 4 that came before it. hell i bought the damn console. i shouldn't be frustrated with a game that isn't fun for me?
No, you should be frustrated that you're an adult and can't use punctuation and grammar properly.

But seriously, yes, you can be frustrated and you have that right but crying about it isn't going to make it any better. No one forced your hand and made you buy that console blindly right off the bat. You could have been a smart consumer and waited for reviews or found a friend who bought it and played a little of their copy first to see how you liked it. These are consequences to your actions.

That's one of the biggest problems now with the community, buying games or consoles is a CHOICE that YOU make as a consumer. The solution to most of the negative community's problems is simple: Be smarter and make wiser decisions with your money. No one is making you buy this stuff.
Wow!! I just looked! You haven't even played the game. You are such a troll. Go find something else to do. This is the definition of a loser. Trying to yuck our yum. Trying to -Yoink- on out beloved franchise that you don't even play. Must be a PS4 executive or something. Go play the only exclusive that y'all have uncharted which is about a 8hr campaign. I'll enjoy my halo mp!
Sexy Boat wrote:
Low reviews by journalists and customers alike already, the campaign being very underwhelming and a total bait and switch from what you guys advertised before release, the multiplayer still looking like and feeling like and playing like a combination of CoD and Battlefield, REQ packs to nickel and dime the modern casual playerbase, and releasing a game with less content at launch.

I'm sorry but this game doesn't scream being a natural progression from Halo 2/3 at all. The multiplayer gameplay shows it, the elementary writing and story shows it, and the removal and delay of so much other features that became staples in Halo 2 and 3 shows it. With the next CoD and Fallout just on the horizon I expect Halo 5 to turn out like Halo 4 all over again.

3 botched launches of Halo games. I think it's time someone else takes the helm of Halo development because you guys aren't listening to the classic Halo fans and you guys can't seem to bring back the game to its roots when it was at its peak during Halo 3.
I don't understand why people don't like this story. Compared to some games, yah it's underwhelming, but I constantly hear people referring back to the first 3 Halo games. What? For those who have forgotten the plots of the first three games they were basically black and white ( meaning that there was a CLEAR difference from good and evil) which had a very predictable outcome. Even though the means of accomplishing these tasks were interesting, we all knew that somehow the bad guys would be stopped.
Not true. The first three Halo games were about determining the Evil you speak of...and it wasn't even necessarily about the Evil, it was about these artifacts and installations. You have Forerunner technology being discovered by multiple races, namely, the covenant -- a large collection of mixed races who follow their religious belief system. They thought these Forerunner installations to be relics to their "great journey." Master Chief and Cortana arrived at the conclusion that Halo was a weapon of evil(not entirely true) and in the process, the Covenant then inadvertently released the true enemy called the Flood(the world eaters) and then Chief and Cortana blew up the ring...and yet, you still tended to think the entire war was about Humanity versus Covenant, but that is more or less just clashing ideologies and the Covenant feeling threatened by our rapid growth, and our disbelief in their religious initiative.

Later, in H2, it turns out there are more of these rings, the Forerunners supposedly were wiped out by the Flood and designed these sentinels to cleanse and contain, with the rings acting as fail-safes...in the event that the Forerunner's Flood containment was unsuccessful(thanks to the Covenant, flood threats thrived once again) The rings would activate and destroy the Flood's food(all life in the universe). You can't tell me there was too much black and white in this story arc...especially, once you include the sub-stories, such as Covenant break-away entities like The Arbiter, the introduction of Brutes and their replacement of the Elites, Master Chief and Cortana's dynamically growing relationship and bond etc. If you asked me, the story had a tendency to go A.D.D, due, to so much lore. That's hard to cover outside of several books.
Sexy Boat wrote:
Low reviews by journalists and customers alike already, the campaign being very underwhelming and a total bait and switch from what you guys advertised before release, the multiplayer still looking like and feeling like and playing like a combination of CoD and Battlefield, REQ packs to nickel and dime the modern casual playerbase, and releasing a game with less content at launch.

I'm sorry but this game doesn't scream being a natural progression from Halo 2/3 at all. The multiplayer gameplay shows it, the elementary writing and story shows it, and the removal and delay of so much other features that became staples in Halo 2 and 3 shows it. With the next CoD and Fallout just on the horizon I expect Halo 5 to turn out like Halo 4 all over again.

3 botched launches of Halo games. I think it's time someone else takes the helm of Halo development because you guys aren't listening to the classic Halo fans and you guys can't seem to bring back the game to its roots when it was at its peak during Halo 3.
I don't understand why people don't like this story. Compared to some games, yah it's underwhelming, but I constantly hear people referring back to the first 3 Halo games. What? For those who have forgotten the plots of the first three games they were basically black and white ( meaning that there was a CLEAR difference from good and evil) which had a very predictable outcome. Even though the means of accomplishing these tasks were interesting, we all knew that somehow the bad guys would be stopped. Halo 5 however makes it very hard to discern the good from evil which makes for a more interesting outcome. SPOILERS ahead by the way. Even though Cortana's end result could have been good, would it be worth the cost to achieve peace. Master Chief struggles between what the closest thing he has ever had to him wants and realizing where the line should be drawn when trying to achieve peace. Then you have Locke's team trying to decide how far they will go just to follow orders. Will they hunt the greatest hero of humanity or help him? I don't understand why people are having issues with this. Compared to the Last of Us or another story powerhouse of course it's not as good, but looking at the original Halo games' stories, it seems to be almost an improvement to the usual "save the planet" or "Finish the Fight" crap we have seen in the previous games. I ask everyone who writes about this game to please compare only the facts between the games and not use nostalgia against Halo 5 because it is new. While Halo 5 does have some problems it has made MANY improvements to series. If you were expecting a rehash of Halo 2 and Halo 3, Halo MCC is always available to you. However if you want to see the series actually progress and evolve in a good direction, Halo 5 has done a pretty good job. Now onto Multiplayer, what staples were removed? Everything is still there. Things were added yes but when I get into a fight with someone it's still basically the same. Try to strafe and out maneuver the opponent, land head shots, maybe chuck a grenade to bring his shields down, and the better man comes out on top. Sure they added Thrusters, Sprint, Charge, and Ground Pound for easier movement through the map and some cool ways to kill people. However what the fanboys forget is that these have been tested in the past Halo games. Bungie Halo fanboys REFUSE to accept most of these were in the form of armor abilities in some way back in Reach: Sprint and Evade for example, and those were the balanced abilities. In Halo 4, fans were upset with the "unbalanced" armor abilities, even though most of those same fans praised Reach with its horde of unbalanced abilities, and they were also upset with Sprint becoming an ability for everyone, which I see why. However Halo 5 has made sprint balanced with the shield recharge being reset upon sprinting, which makes sprinting in combat a stupid idea for the most part. Sprint is now only to make movement around the map faster. The thrusters are only useful once or twice in a fight and seem to be mainly for clearing longer jumps and juking out you opponent in some scenarios. But for the first time in Halo series, these abilities were given to everyone removing any unfair advantage from the gameplay. Lastly, REQ packs are not a pay to win. No Warzone game I have been in was determined by who had the right REQ card. The matchmaking is also based upon your REQ collection so it will be next to impossible to be completely outmatched by a really good REQ collection. I like having something to buy with saved points from matches, either from Arena or Warzone. This brings back the single best addition to customization in all of the Halo games. A currency to by stuff with which was introduced in Reach. Even though it is now random it is still fun to open a pack and see your loot sprawl across the screen. In conclusion, I have problems with our Halo fan base being unpleasable and in some instances simply unfair to new releases because of their nostalgic memories of the previous games. I'm sorry for the terribly long post, but it was necessary to avoid being antagonized by the more rash end of the community who is unwilling to hear a different opinion. Listing out my entire argument will help them either see my point or at least realize I do have reasons for my argument.
I like your opinion. If you look at the guy who wrote this record, he does t even play halo
that is relatively low for halo standards
While that may be true, review scores aren't going to be as high as they used to be because reviewers scrutinize games so much more than they used to, and also because there are simply a lot more reviewers out there. Ultimately I kind of feel that the world would be better served if review scores would go the way of the dinosaur anyways because the meat of a review is usually so much more telling than the final score.
Blind Fanboys hate incoming in 3.... 2.... 1....
People that actually like this game are "blind fanboys" LMAO!

The immaturity continues!
You guys just don't get it do you? Throwing gimmicky armor abilities willy-nilly doesn't represent the classic Halo gameplay.
Throwing in dual wielding and vehicle boarding was not part of classic gameplay, but became part of it. And that was from the sequel that so many people still gush and gasm over.

You say they're gimmicky. I say they're useful additions to add to the Spartans' arsenal. The suit they wear is now a potent tool of death.

Ys they took out ordnances and tactical packages and the like but you still have Spartan abilities that make the gameplay random and that it caters to your average casual CoD kiddie.
Explain both of these points in detail please rather than reusing the same statement. Tell me HOW they make gameplay random. Tell me WHY they cater to the CoD player.

Halo 3 never had any of this sprinting around to get away from nades, clamber and thruster packing into enemies mumbo jumbo.
No it didn't, but I might have killed to make my Spartan move faster than a tortoise. Those moments in BTB when you spawn in the middle and there's no vehicles nearby...
Halo 3 had equipment. Bubble shields, trip mines, flares, jammers, cloak, grav lifts, etc. One could argue those were gimmicky additions, silly ones at least since most of them were oversized orbs larger than a Spartan's helmet.

It was a pure Battlefield filled with people actually using their mics, strategizing against the opponents' use of the gun/grenade/melee/vehicle playstyle.
Last I checked people can still use their mics. Spartan abilities have no bearing on that. All they do is augment the player in their use of the guns, grenades, and melee.

It wasn't cat and mouse gameplay like CoD.
Last time I played CoD (MW2) it was more "I see you, you die before you have a chance to react", life spans were notoriously short. No idea if they still are.

You had to learn of weapon placements and spawn timers.
You still do. Spartan Charge will do -Yoink- all against a rocket or shotgun to the face.

It wasn't simply a run and gun.
Neither is this.
– But dual-wielding and hijacking complimented the pure core of Halo gameplay, it didn't drastically change it like 343 is doing with its own "innovations". Your point here is moot. If I wanted this fast style of play run and gunning I'd buy CoD, not Halo.

– I'm heading towards a player and almost kill him with my AR but he sprints away around a corner and is able to quickly camp somewhere to recharge their shields. Then he could easily use his stabilizer while I come around and easily flank me. This is only an example but one small one compared to the other tons of scenarios I could draw up from these armor abilities. Instead of relying on the map itself and the basic guns/grenades/melee/vehicles technique from the classic Halo, this heightened mobility and the maps that are made to promote its usage create randomness and offer no strategic value within the gameplay whatsoever. You just run and gun. That's it.

– I don't remember ever spawning in the middle of maps during huge gametypes like BTB. Even so our movement speed was enough to get us to the action right away. We also had vehicles and it was the responsibility of the teams to use them effectively and as long as possible and strategically. Not just go ito the front lines and splatter as many enemies walking towards you as possible, unless that's what you were into.

– Some argue that equipment was nooby, but it was small. It didn't change the whole dynamic of Halo gameplay. It didn't alter it to become more modern. It didn't make Halo feel like a CoD and Titanfall hybrid. I personally didn't mind for equipment at all. Something you could only use once, as a surprise, and you had to learn how to use it effectively to flank your enemy before they flanked you or turn the tide in the ensuing battle.

Yet players slowly stopped using their mics after Halo 3. After Reach, when Halo became a clear CoD clone with a Halo skin on it, you almost never encounter multiple players each and every game use their mics. This "evolved" dynamic of Halo gameplay devalues teamwork and promotes almost 24/7 lone wolfing by run and gunning.

– Spartan abilities are basically armor abilities. They promote that style of play where whoever sees who first will usually win. That was never the case with the classic Halos when these modern features weren't in the gameplay.
This is off topic, but you say it's because of gameplay mechanics that players stopped using their mics? I believe the decline of game chat use can be traced back to one definitive moment in Xbox history, the introduction of Party Chat. I can remember Halo 3's (or any Xbox 360 game) game Chat being so alive on release in 2007. But, just one year later, on November 18, 2008, an Xbox 360 Title Update introduced Party Chat to its players.
I believe this is Ground Zero when it comes to why game chat lobbys are desolate, not just in Halo, but all multiplayer games.
Low reviews by journalists and customers alike already, the campaign being very underwhelming and a total bait and switch from what you guys advertised before release, the multiplayer still looking like and feeling like and playing like a combination of CoD and Battlefield, REQ packs to nickel and dime the modern casual playerbase, and releasing a game with less content at launch.

I'm sorry but this game doesn't scream being a natural progression from Halo 2/3 at all. The multiplayer gameplay shows it, the elementary writing and story shows it, and the removal and delay of so much other features that became staples in Halo 2 and 3 shows it. With the next CoD and Fallout just on the horizon I expect Halo 5 to turn out like Halo 4 all over again.

3 botched launches of Halo games. I think it's time someone else takes the helm of Halo development because you guys aren't listening to the classic Halo fans and you guys can't seem to bring back the game to its roots when it was at its peak during Halo 3.
Cry me a yoinking river.
Low reviews by journalists and customers alike already...
Metacritic of 85 doesn't support your claim.

I will say this about Halo 5's launch. From a technical perspective, it has been rock solid. No downtime, no performance issues, and fast matchmaking. A job well done for 343 this time around.
Well OP considering your service record states you have yet to play a second of Halo 5 makes it hard for me to consider you judgement on the game a valid one, but continue creating thread after thread, most people who are enjoying the game are playing it.
No stats for anything..yet still put his 2 cents in....yoink
The only thing I disagree about is the game play that and the music are the only things good about Halo 5. In beta it felt like CoD AW but now after being fine tuned it just feels right... (Its a lot better then H4 gameplay and more balanced) Although I don't think Warzone is the PVPVE people wanted, its not a replacement for Firefight and I think its just there so they have a reason to have req packs. But even though forge delay pisses me of (especially since the whole game just feels lacking and like it was made in a year) I am willing to wait but If it doesn't come with more custom game options/gamemode and fileshare I will flip sh it... and their reasoning behind releasing 8 gamemodes and 5 playest is BS and btw why is shotty snipers and slayer game its own gamemode ???
Ok, you can have an opinion, but you can also be wrong.. and you sir are very wrong. First, are we bringing up COD as a competitor? It's a cash grab thats all. The campain was awesome. Just some of us *Cough* need something be sour about. This feels nothing like COD nor halo 4. This is a new evolution of gaming. I give it a 9/10! WHO"S WITH ME?
Aggie CMD wrote:
Low reviews by journalists and customers alike already...
Metacritic of 85 doesn't support your claim.

I will say this about Halo 5's launch. From a technical perspective, it has been rock solid. No downtime, no performance issues, and fast matchmaking. A job well done for 343 this time around.
85 is bad for a halo game it should be 90 or more and its still dropping... a lot of sites are giving it 3 stars and you can already pick it up for $50 used
I've been a huge Halo fan and have all the Halo games and DLC up to and including Halo MCC. I still play it for many hours weekly.
This will be the first Halo I am not even going to buy because they've removed all the features I use:
  1. System Link
  2. Split Screen
  3. Forge
  4. Firefight
Okay -- they haven't removed Forge, but since I only play it using System Link or Split Screen, they may as well have. I don't play multiplayer, and campaign mode is basically a one time thing. I play games with my immediate family.

I usually eagerly look forward to Halo game releases, but Halo 5 is a huge disappointment to me.
Yeahhhhhhh...

I personally don't play much split screen anymore since my brother and I are lucky enough to have been able to purchase two separate Xbox's. But, growing up, we've played Halo 1-3 splitscreen campaign so I fully understand the disappointment with the lack of it anywhere. Although, and this is coming from a player who has attended dozens of LAN parties since CE, LAN's are effectively dead thanks to the efficiency of online multiplayer.

But again, to each their own.
NEVER pay attention to user reviews. Anyone can say literally anything. The critical response is great! No negative reviews from reputable critics and very few mixed reviews. The response has been overwhelmingly positive.
I get it OP i do.....that bieng said the gameplay is solid in halo 5, granted the field of view is whack but forge maps can and will fix this. mostly because the line of sights in this has a further drawl distance which bugs the -Yoink- out of me in both halo 4 and halo 5, IE all you see is the color of the spartan and a tiny speck. which can make aiming a chore.
SENCHIEF10 wrote:
Oh go -Yoink- yourself.

The game doesn't play anything like CoD or battlefield, you're just spouting out crap other people are saying. The REQ packs are completely optional, doesn't change the game at all, and can be purchased through in game currencies, and because of them DLC you'd usually pay another 30 bucks for is free.

The campaign was a setup to Halo 6, which is probably the finale, just like Halo 2 was to 3, or last years hunger games was to this year.

Halo is fine. It's fun.
The fact req packs exist is an inherent change to the game. mechanically it is more similar to CoD and BF than it ever will be to halo 2 and 3. If you can't tell the difference between halo 2/3 and halo 5, you must be insane.
How do req packs change the game?

Of course Halo 5 feels different. It's more dynamic, faster, and competitive. It still doesn't feel anything like battlefield or CoD, though. If it were just like halo 2, we'd still be -Yoinking!- playing halo 2. You can do that on master chief edition. It's about the evolution of a franchise... and it was done pretty good. Sure there are complaints but it's pretty minimal.
REQ'S RUIN the game! You shouldn't have to be a badass player to be able to get a tank or banshee depending on how well you do. All these new players out there are happy saying it gives them something for playing for....well, how about just playing to rank up?!?! The only things you should unlock for doing better is armor. Thats it. But -Yoink- with the REQ system. Give us back BUBBLE SHIELDS or the GRAV LIFT! (Why even fade those out??) REQ system takes away from the feel of the game. Like the starwars beta, you shouldn't disappear when you pick up a vehicle....they SHOULD JUST BE ON THE FIELD! No oldschool Halo player is going to be okay with this system for very long.
The lack of Big Team Battle is sorely felt, but understandable. They're trying to get things right while simultaneously pushing their new ideas. Warzone is a lot of fun despite a lot of people not really understanding how to win. I think a mandatory tutorial would have helped a lot. Warzone Assault also needs a bit of work, but once they figure it out a little bit it'll come into its own. There's nothing else like Halo 5 out there right now, and it just feels good. That's the big thing about Halo games, they need to feel good. Everyone loves to champion Halo 3, but its multiplayer always felt incredibly slow to me. Halo 2 felt good, and the arena games in Halo 5 feel like an evolution of that, rather than 4. I'll even go so far to say I enjoyed Halo 4's multiplayer, which was just the next step in the design choices Reach made.

For everyone who's complaining about the sky falling, take off those nostalgia-colored glasses and give the game another shot. The Campaign was a little confusing but only because I thought they were going to go somewhere entirely different with it. I enjoyed the addition of an AI fireteam, even if it's filled with AI teammates who've only got two brain cells and both are fighting for dominance. The mechanics of the game changed in good ways, and it does feel like a natural evolution of the Halo formula.

I've got three complaints about the game and they're all minor.
  • I wish the customization was more than just helmet and armor, even if I really like the options I've unlocked so far. That said, I completely understand that having separate shoulders, arms, and legs for 175 different sets of armor would be a new and profoundly horrifying kind of organizational insanity.
  • The Elites sound wrong. Their voices are too deep, to the point that they sound more like Brutes in Halo 3 and ODST than their previous incarnations. I miss the classic armor designs too, but I understand that this is five years after the end of the old Covenant and the Elites have been moving back to more traditional designs. I LOVE the new Covenant vehicle designs though. The new Spirit is gorgeous.
  • No Spartan Ops. I really enjoyed that storyline, even if it was only recycled multiplayer maps. I had a lot of fun using my Spartan in a story-based adventure of my own. Maybe it's just because I've spent so much time playing Destiny but I there's just something nice about being able to play as your character rather than an existing one.
I've enjoyed the game and I'm looking forward to the revamped forge mode. Not to mention the 15 free maps we're all getting. I'm willing to accept entirely optional microtransactions for free content. Like it or not, that's the way everything is moving. Would you rather pay $15 for four maps or just get them for free because someone didn't want to play enough games to unlock a REQ pack? Even that's painless. Three rounds in Warzone will net you a silver pack for sure. You can probably earn a bronze pack in one if you're playing well enough, and those come with boosts to increase the points you earn. As far as annoying microtransaction -Yoink- goes, this is a pretty painless execution.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 15
  4. 16
  5. 17
  6. 18
  7. 19
  8. ...
  9. 43