Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] Halo 5 isn't really a "true" Halo experience

OP XanaReplica

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. 15
  8. ...
  9. 17
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.
Lol, after 9 months at launch? Tell me, what Halo game only had six 4v4 playlists at launch? IT WAS AN INCOMPLETE GAME BUDDY. You cant justify -Yoink-. Halo 4 knocked off Halo. Get your facts straight m8. Or get rekt by the truth of these statements.
At launch, but now it's pretty full. Just to let you know, halo 3 ended up with 14 playlists, and halo 5 now has 14 playlists.
Quality is what counts. Halo 3 social playlists WERE ACTUALLY SOCIAL, not having hidden ranks inside of them like Halo 5's. If you want to be technical, most of Halo 5 isn't social because most of the playlists have god damn ranking in them, whether you can see it or not. Halo 3, a game that was released 9 years ago, had more playlists at launch than Halo 5 did. Disgraceful
Are you saying halo 5 doesn't have quality? For the hundredth time, hidden ranks don't make ANYTHING competitive. If you take off your nostalgia goggles and think back to halo 3's social slayer, you'd remember that there were tons of matches where teams would get destroyed because high level players would match up against low level players. The only reason why some take social seriously is because they care about their stats, and social and ranked stats are kept together. As I already said, that only applies for some.

Just because a game is more recent doesn't mean it has to have way more content. Graphics, yes, a newer game should have better graphics than an older game (which halo 5 does). Content, definitely not. So, no, it's not "disgraceful" by any means. Honestly to me, you sound like a whining kid when he doesn't get sprinkles on his ice cream.
Two things:

You love provoking arguments but unfortunately, I am not that type of person. "Honestly to me, you sound like a whining kid when he doesn't get sprinkles on his ice cream." You sir, made me laugh out loud for a solid five minutes. If you read my post in detail, you would have seen that at launch, Halo 3, a game that was released 9 years ago, had more playlists at launch than Halo 5 did. DISGRACEFUL. Of course, it seems you did not have your reading glasses on at the time you read my post, hence me repeating it in bold.

Second, you said, and I repeat "For the hundredth time, hidden ranks don't make ANYTHING competitive." So tell me, a rank is supposed to put players of similar skill levels together correct? And if it is hidden, it is still there correct? And before you say "No, it is not there" watch the video of an avid Halo player almost reduced to tears because he can't find a Big Team Battle match because he was too good at it, and due to his skill level being so high, he almost never found a match. And this was supposed to be in a social playlist... Your entire philosophy is, in a nutshell, rotten to the core because people are still put against players of their skill level, which isn't supposed to happen in a social playlist, because there should be NO ranks at all.

This my friend, is how your utterly squash an argument as poorly constructed and written as yours. I bid you, good day.
Why do you think that hidden ranks make social playlists competitive? I'd really like to hear your explanation. Social playlists are just meant to be more laid back than competitive playlists, and with hidden ranks or not, halo 5's social playlists accomplishes that.

You are twisting my words now. A child can have an opinion that all ice cream should be free, but that is considered childish, is it not? You sounded entitled when you said it was a disgrace. You know what other type of people are usually entitled? Childs, so in my opinion, what said made you appear childish TO ME.
*Children. The plural of child is children.
Oh -Yoink-.
Unknown 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.
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.

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.
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.
It was knocked off in Reach but halo 4 pushed it farther away.
Reach was still an amazing game though and 4 was really lack luster...
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.
Halo reach was incredibly popular
But it didn't hold the throne.
Meh, I still loved reach, just curious...what game "stole the throme"?
Call of Duty.
Fair enough...but CoDs days are nearly numbered IMO lol
i got to agree with OP. h5 doesn't feel like a real halo game. to me it feels closer to CoD/BF/Titanfall.
lLockout wrote:
Phaaze wrote:
Quote:
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
Arc Trooper,

I replied to this in your thread you made sometime last week and I don't believe I got an answer.

Quantity isn't the issue. It's quality and variety. People who want social playlists don't just want BTB, Infection, Grifball, and so on. Why is it that we are forced to play these playlists? Why can't 4v4 Slayer, CTF, Strongholds, and gametypes that are completely missing like Oddball, why can't these playlists be social? Going by the number of playlists tp make a point is absurd; there's no variety and there's too much exclusivity when it comes to this.

As for popularity falling off for Reach, I recall a number of disgruntled players disliking the game because of how different it was The game was not perfect, but if it wasn't playing at a constant 20FPS on backwards compatibility, I can assure you that I and many other players would be playing that over Halo 5.
Halo Reach is without a doubt the game that marks the beginning of Halo's decline. The majority of the competitive-minded players either left completely or played it much less than previous titles.

I can assure you that I and many other players would wonder why on earth anyone would go back to playing Reach on the premise that it is a more "true halo experience" - Because the masses who left Halo during Reach left because they felt it was the complete opposite of a Halo experience.

For me, Halo 5 is the game that actually brought me back to the series full-time. I only played Reach and H4 on occasion and played other games just as much if not more than I played Halo. But after H5 came out, I have gone back to only playing Halo - with maybe 1 or 2 weekends where Ive played a different game.

The only thing I agree with you on is the lack of quality social playlists. I'm a competitive minded player, but on days where I want to sit back and relax, I find it hard to scratch that itch. But that's all I can agree with you on.

Reach and H4 catered to casuals, so the competitive players disliked Reach and 4 for the same reasons you're complaining about H5 - That is, the game not catering to the type of "Halo" they wanted to play.
The problem is that Reach did have a competitive atmosphere but the main complaint anyone ever had was visible blooming reticles, as if spread was never a thing until then. That, and Armor Lock. While I didn't exactly fully enjoy Armor Abilities, they are worlds easier to deal with in Reach than they are in Halo 5, and of course, this is all a matter of opinion. I'm not complaining much about being catered to, I'm just wondering about variety. I will, reluctantly, play ranked playlists in Halo 5. I hardly enjoy it, but I will do it. I don't agree with games being "catered to" a certain type of player, anyway. As I said before, Reach did not cater to a specific player and neither did Halo 4. Halo 4 also has a competitive atmosphere but not to the same degree of other Halo games. That being said, Halo 4 tried to reel in fans of different games in a pathetic attempt to get more fans, but if someone wants to play a game that's like that game, they are going to play that game, not a game that mimics it.

It's not about going back to Reach for a "true Halo experience"; it's simply a better game to me.
Phaaze wrote:
Quote:
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
Arc Trooper,

I replied to this in your thread you made sometime last week and I don't believe I got an answer.

Quantity isn't the issue. It's quality and variety. People who want social playlists don't just want BTB, Infection, Grifball, and so on. Why is it that we are forced to play these playlists? Why can't 4v4 Slayer, CTF, Strongholds, and gametypes that are completely missing like Oddball, why can't these playlists be social? Going by the number of playlists tp make a point is absurd; there's no variety and there's too much exclusivity when it comes to this.

As for popularity falling off for Reach, I recall a number of disgruntled players disliking the game because of how different it was The game was not perfect, but if it wasn't playing at a constant 20FPS on backwards compatibility, I can assure you that I and many other players would be playing that over Halo 5.
During it's runtime, people threw more fire than this game than people hate Halo 5 right now. Pretty much these exact same threads were thrown everywhere on B.net.

Also, Reach is playing at a near constant 30FPS as of this week.
Then it looks like I'll be knocking the dust off it and playing it then.

As for your first statement, I can't exactly take your word for it. I agree that Reach got more flak, but that's probably because it didn't have near as many people sticking up for it like people are doing for Halo 5. Not from what I remember, but, memory is a bad basis for stating facts.
Hey you know whats not a true experience OP? Your lack of thought and mind
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.
Lol, after 9 months at launch? Tell me, what Halo game only had six 4v4 playlists at launch? IT WAS AN INCOMPLETE GAME BUDDY. You cant justify -Yoink-. Halo 4 knocked off Halo. Get your facts straight m8. Or get rekt by the truth of these statements.
At launch, but now it's pretty full. Just to let you know, halo 3 ended up with 14 playlists, and halo 5 now has 14 playlists.
Quality is what counts. Halo 3 social playlists WERE ACTUALLY SOCIAL, not having hidden ranks inside of them like Halo 5's. If you want to be technical, most of Halo 5 isn't social because most of the playlists have god damn ranking in them, whether you can see it or not. Halo 3, a game that was released 9 years ago, had more playlists at launch than Halo 5 did. Disgraceful
Are you saying halo 5 doesn't have quality? For the hundredth time, hidden ranks don't make ANYTHING competitive. If you take off your nostalgia goggles and think back to halo 3's social slayer, you'd remember that there were tons of matches where teams would get destroyed because high level players would match up against low level players. The only reason why some take social seriously is because they care about their stats, and social and ranked stats are kept together. As I already said, that only applies for some.

Just because a game is more recent doesn't mean it has to have way more content. Graphics, yes, a newer game should have better graphics than an older game (which halo 5 does). Content, definitely not. So, no, it's not "disgraceful" by any means. Honestly to me, you sound like a whining kid when he doesn't get sprinkles on his ice cream.
Two things:

You love provoking arguments but unfortunately, I am not that type of person. "Honestly to me, you sound like a whining kid when he doesn't get sprinkles on his ice cream." You sir, made me laugh out loud for a solid five minutes. If you read my post in detail, you would have seen that at launch, Halo 3, a game that was released 9 years ago, had more playlists at launch than Halo 5 did. DISGRACEFUL. Of course, it seems you did not have your reading glasses on at the time you read my post, hence me repeating it in bold.

Second, you said, and I repeat "For the hundredth time, hidden ranks don't make ANYTHING competitive." So tell me, a rank is supposed to put players of similar skill levels together correct? And if it is hidden, it is still there correct? And before you say "No, it is not there" watch the video of an avid Halo player almost reduced to tears because he can't find a Big Team Battle match because he was too good at it, and due to his skill level being so high, he almost never found a match. And this was supposed to be in a social playlist... Your entire philosophy is, in a nutshell, rotten to the core because people are still put against players of their skill level, which isn't supposed to happen in a social playlist, because there should be NO ranks at all.

This my friend, is how your utterly squash an argument as poorly constructed and written as yours. I bid you, good day.
Why do you think that hidden ranks make social playlists competitive? I'd really like to hear your explanation. Social playlists are just meant to be more laid back than competitive playlists, and with hidden ranks or not, halo 5's social playlists accomplishes that.
No, no it doesn't. Like it or not, with halo 5's mechanics giving way for faster kills, and requiring a higher reaction time compared to previous iterations, it barely leaves any breathing room, even in social playlists. This adds with the fact that skilled players use these game modes to boost wins, commendations, and their K.D. which overall makes social very competitive. You have to literally fight for you're right to chill because others don't ever stop, and are given rewards for going against a playlists purpose.

Thats the reality of the situation. halo 5 has it so deeply wired into its system to be competitive, to never stop, that unless its action sack or infection, you will most likely encounter competitive boosters.
As a newer and very low ranked player I am not qualified to say much about gameplay mechanics but I will only say this - with the lack of SA's and Sprint being limited, Reach and 4 still feel much more similar to 1-3 than they do to 5, at least to me. In 5 the movement speed is so much faster due to both infinite Sprint and SA's that it plays like a very different game. That's all I can really say.
Phaaze wrote:
Phaaze wrote:
Quote:
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
Arc Trooper,

I replied to this in your thread you made sometime last week and I don't believe I got an answer.

Quantity isn't the issue. It's quality and variety. People who want social playlists don't just want BTB, Infection, Grifball, and so on. Why is it that we are forced to play these playlists? Why can't 4v4 Slayer, CTF, Strongholds, and gametypes that are completely missing like Oddball, why can't these playlists be social? Going by the number of playlists tp make a point is absurd; there's no variety and there's too much exclusivity when it comes to this.

As for popularity falling off for Reach, I recall a number of disgruntled players disliking the game because of how different it was The game was not perfect, but if it wasn't playing at a constant 20FPS on backwards compatibility, I can assure you that I and many other players would be playing that over Halo 5.
During it's runtime, people threw more fire than this game than people hate Halo 5 right now. Pretty much these exact same threads were thrown everywhere on B.net.

Also, Reach is playing at a near constant 30FPS as of this week.
Then it looks like I'll be knocking the dust off it and playing it then.

As for your first statement, I can't exactly take your word for it. I agree that Reach got more flak, but that's probably because it didn't have near as many people sticking up for it like people are doing for Halo 5. Not from what I remember, but, memory is a bad basis for stating facts.
Reach also had to deal with Halo 3's large population, as well as its own. Halo 5 on the other hand, deals with those capable of sticking through both Halo 4 and MCC, which probably isn't the same amount of people as Halo Reach, let alone Halo 3.
Halo 5 kind of just swam out into the ether with the rest of the generic FPS shooters.
Phaaze wrote:
Quote:
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
Arc Trooper,

I replied to this in your thread you made sometime last week and I don't believe I got an answer.

Quantity isn't the issue. It's quality and variety. People who want social playlists don't just want BTB, Infection, Grifball, and so on. Why is it that we are forced to play these playlists? Why can't 4v4 Slayer, CTF, Strongholds, and gametypes that are completely missing like Oddball, why can't these playlists be social? Going by the number of playlists tp make a point is absurd; there's no variety and there's too much exclusivity when it comes to this.

As for popularity falling off for Reach, I recall a number of disgruntled players disliking the game because of how different it was The game was not perfect, but if it wasn't playing at a constant 20FPS on backwards compatibility, I can assure you that I and many other players would be playing that over Halo 5.
Just to let you know, it will notify me if you make my name blue like this: PhaazeSorry I never responded to you last week. I tried to get to everyone in my thread, but I think I missed a few.

I don't really understand your point. There's tons of variety. Tell me how action sack, infection, grifball, BTB, the weekly social playlist (which is super fiesta), WZ, WZA, and WZFF don't count as variety. No, not every single gametype from every single halo has its own playlist, but most are available in customs if you want them so bad (excluding King of the Hill, Race, and one flag ctf, but those are all downloadable).

If you want to play Reach, it is currently functioning better on the Xbox one than the 360.
It's cool.

My main point is how exclusivity rips competitive and casual players apart, and I really hate using the word casual, especially in this context. In order to play anything you see in Arena, I have to play in ranked playlists. As I said in a post in your thread, telling me to play Custom Games isn't a solution. I want to play this games with random people back to back. Not everyone has seven friends to constantly play Custom Games with, not to mention you can't use REQ Cards in Customs, either. Players who don't care for rank but still want to play basic Halo gametypes should be able to without subjecting themselves to the competitive atmosphere in ranked playlists.

In addition, these gametypes I can easily download, I shouldn't have to. There are a lot of basic variants of Flag and Ball that have been absent from this game since launch. Those missing gametypes should be ranked and social.

So, in terms of variety when it comes to 4v4 unranked playlists of Flag, Ball, and Slayer gametypes, there is none. That's what I mean.
Phaaze wrote:
Phaaze wrote:
Quote:
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
Arc Trooper,

I replied to this in your thread you made sometime last week and I don't believe I got an answer.

Quantity isn't the issue. It's quality and variety. People who want social playlists don't just want BTB, Infection, Grifball, and so on. Why is it that we are forced to play these playlists? Why can't 4v4 Slayer, CTF, Strongholds, and gametypes that are completely missing like Oddball, why can't these playlists be social? Going by the number of playlists tp make a point is absurd; there's no variety and there's too much exclusivity when it comes to this.

As for popularity falling off for Reach, I recall a number of disgruntled players disliking the game because of how different it was The game was not perfect, but if it wasn't playing at a constant 20FPS on backwards compatibility, I can assure you that I and many other players would be playing that over Halo 5.
During it's runtime, people threw more fire than this game than people hate Halo 5 right now. Pretty much these exact same threads were thrown everywhere on B.net.

Also, Reach is playing at a near constant 30FPS as of this week.
Then it looks like I'll be knocking the dust off it and playing it then.

As for your first statement, I can't exactly take your word for it. I agree that Reach got more flak, but that's probably because it didn't have near as many people sticking up for it like people are doing for Halo 5. Not from what I remember, but, memory is a bad basis for stating facts.
Reach also had to deal with Halo 3's large population, as well as its own. Halo 5 on the other hand, deals with those capable of sticking through both Halo 4 and MCC, which probably isn't the same amount of people as Halo Reach, let alone Halo 3.
That might be true.

Also to clarify, when I said "Reach got more flak, but that's probably because it didn't have near as many people sticking up for it", I mean that I don't recall people vocally defending Reach to counter all the negative comments that it got in comparison to Halo 5. Again, memory isn't the best way to state that, but currently it's the only thing I can go off of.
So, playlists that are not ranked are social? What a logic.
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.
They're all ranked... If I could find you the video there's proof that they are.
Justima wrote:
I would still give low rating for Halo 5 as a generic FPS for reasons.
Reasons, my friend, is not a reason
Justima wrote:
I would still give low rating for Halo 5 as a generic FPS for reasons.
Reasons, my friend, is not a reason
It's there, I wrote reasons, not a reason.
Justima wrote:
So, playlists that are not ranked are social? What a logic.
Yes that's actually how it works.
Herecy wrote:
Unknown 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.
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.

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.
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.
It was knocked off in Reach but halo 4 pushed it farther away.
Reach was still an amazing game though and 4 was really lack luster...
Nah bro. 4 was an amazing game, but the gameplay wasn't very halo, so it kinda died out. Also the fact that it wasn't made by Bungie kinda helped it die a bit faster.
Justima wrote:
So, playlists that are not ranked are social? What a logic.
Yes that's actually how it works.
Remove ranks in Team Arena, then is it a social playlist that doesn't cater competitive players? Adding ranks to Infection, is it a competitive playlist that doesn't cater casual players?
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. 15
  8. ...
  9. 17