Just my take on this:If you read what I posted before, I agreed that it fell, but not as much as you're talking about. It was more like a rebound to yourself than a missed freethrow. 343 had a chance to fix things that Bungie put in place, but completely blew it with Halo 4. What used to be optional was now mandatory and the whole game suffered because of it. You didn't have to use power ups, dual wielding, equipment or Armor Abilities in CE, 2, 3 and Reach, I know I never did, and now 343 wants us to always use a new mechanic? The new mechanic should have gone through another phase of public testing as an Armor Ability, modifying it to suit the core of the game more.Wild Vegetable wrote:The statistics say that Halo Reach never even made the sales of Halo 3. So right then and there, Halo didn't get more popular, it got less popular.The statistics say otherwise. Halo Reach fell off the top 3 right after 343's title update. I forgot what it did, but I'm guessing most people were mad about it. I wasn't. You can just google "halo population drop" for these stats. They're not hard to find.Arc Trooper 48 wrote:It was knocked off in Reach but halo 4 pushed it farther away.I'm not OP, but did you even understand the post? How does a game being fun as an argument have no sense? Halo 5 is way more focused on competitiveness than any other Halo has been. Just watch the ViDocs from both Bungie and 343 and you'll see how the other games were built with fun in mind.AttestedMoon062 wrote:It's weird that you liked 4 more than 5, considering it had personal loadouts and perks making it the least "Halo" mp game. 5 reversed both and brought back the equal starts (not including warzone which is an "anything goes" game), even made all the weapons actually useful for the first time.
Don't get me wrong, I still liked 4, it's just this argument makes little to no sense.Halo wasn't knocked off the throne in Reach. Halo 4 did that. Reach just caused a side-step that could have been easily fixed if 343 hadn't been all like "We need to distance ourselves from 'Bungie's vision' of the game at our first attempt." The quickest and largest drop in Halo players (that we know of) is still at Halo 4.Arc Trooper 48 wrote:How does halo 5 focus too heavily on esports when there's 8 social playlists and 6 ranked playlists? Halo was knocked off its throne during halo Reach, not halo 5. Can you further explain why you don't think halo 5 is fun but halo 4 was?
Edit: Also, your post doesn't really explain the title.
Unless you have a better reason for Halo's spiral downwards in population, I'm sticking with what I see. 343 abandoned Bungie's "vision" for the franchise and left it to rot while polishing the remains. Almost balanced for fun > balanced for competitiveness. You don't have to look much farther than the most popular game of each genre on each platform to see that it's true.
You blame 343i for abandoning Bungie's "vision", when it was Bungie that abandoned their "vision" in Halo 3 and made Halo Reach based on Loadouts and Armor Abilities. They took the bad things from Halo 3 and made it worse.
Equipment became Armor Abilities.
The BR's random shot mechanic became the DMR's Bloom.
The melee system had no bleedthrough anymore.
-Yoink- 343i fixed most of their problems with their TU. Active Camo was reduced. Armor Lock wasn't blatantly overpowered to the point of being broken. Bloom was removed.
By definition, Halo Reach was where it started to fall, since it didn't meet the sales of the game that preceded it.
As for Loadouts? Everyone still had "equal starts" in Reach. Your team and the other team had the exact same equipment in the ranked playlists, so you could counter them when you respawn. With Halo 4? They ruined the philosophy of Loadouts and made Classes instead. Level up to get newer and potentially better items. You never knew what the enemy could have. Plasma Pistol and DMR? Maybe. AR and Frags? Only for new players. Promethean Vision? Guaranteed. I admit I wasn't a competitive player, but I know what made the game tick for a lot of people. Halo 4's philosophy was all about "me, me, me," instead of "team, team, team," like in the other games.
I was never talking about sales, but recurring players. If you want to talk about it, fine then. Reach would have eventually reached Halo 3's sales numbers had 343 not rushed out Halo 4, since Halo Reach was doing pretty well being in the top three in most played games on Xbox Live for a full year. I don't know the exact factors that led to the drop in population, but Batman: Arkham City, Forza 4, NBA 2K12, Dead Island, Dead Rising 2, Battlefield 3, Skyrim, Saint's Row 3, Assassin's Creed: Revelations, Gears of War 3 and Modern Warfare 3 were released around the time the game fell off. Maybe the oversaturation of the games industry happened, and then 343 did something wrong to miss the first free throw. I don't know exactly what it was, but I'm guessing it was a "selfish" and "mass appeal" multiplayer design philosophy. We already had one "me, me, me" shooter game, so why make another one almost like it?
reach sild 3-4 million less than h3, which is quite the drop really. You then say that number would've rose had other games not been in the way but that really isn't an excuse cause every game out there has to deal with that, most don't all of a sudden pull in millions more a year after launch, and really the most sales will happen in the first quarter of a games life cycle. Do people buy after? Yes, but not by the millions. I will say 343 most definately could've went back on what bungie did wrong with reach, unfortunately they didn't and it's still apparent to this day.
Onto losdouts: first if all they went vs halos philosophy of map pickups and equal starts. Your arguement really isn't a strong one as equal starts is where everyone uses the same equipment from the start, anything else is fair game after. Take destiny for example, Part of why it's not featured competitive wise is due to the randomness that its weapons and abilities add, had they made it less redundant it could've been featured like a redundant CoD does. Loadouts can play in the competitive scene but as said, halos philosophy was never built to work like that. There really is no point referencing h4 doing it worse cause both did the same thing in the end and whose to say bungie wouldn't have expanded on it? Lastly when you say hreach have you a chance to counter losdouts, why don't you elaborate? Cuz realistically that can happen with any game that features them. What happens when your opponent then changes? You then do it again as well. It's why people dislike it and preferred halo sticking to its map sandbox with weapon pickups like h5 does now. It's also why you spawn with every ability rather than picking one at a time every respawn.
i really disagree on this "me, me, me" thing as well. Halos even more team focused then ever due to it making player empowerment less of a priority. Team shooting and map rotation is pretty much a must if you want to win games where as lone wolfing it will only get you team shot by the opponents and disorganizing your teams ability to fight back.