Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Legacy Halo

Halo's Campaign Dead?

OP xXTheEpigoneXx

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Quote:
Lack of theater/XP/Commendations means no real incentive to replay.
Exactly...

Bungie put all sorts of Easter eggs in the Reach campaign as well as allowed many different ways to get through each level, many different ways to defeat the enemies, and on and on. The depth and creativity in game design shows. Theatre mode provided incentive to see and duplicate what others have done. i.e. The first SLASO players taught others how to do it through campaign films - or spend hours (on each mission) trying to do it. Just last week I got the "Fast and Low" daily challenge for the first time. A couple months ago we saw the disco dancing Covenant, and flew a Pelican and Phantom on the New Alexandria mission for the first time.

Getting out of the ODST Firefight map Lost Platoon and seeing Sabres fly by a full year before we saw Sabres in Reach. ODST having Destiny posters on the walls of a couple rooms/building in the 2009 ODST campaign didn't mean much at the time - do now.

To 343's credit, Halo 4's Reclaimer mission does allow you to jump though or go around a couple shield walls, and jetpack up/over the cliff to get onto the Lich. And, there are a couple other run/fly-arounds in other missions. Unfortunately, without a capture card and Youtube, we can only talk about it.
Quote:
If only there was some sort of episodic mode that released new missions on a weekly basis and continued the story of Halo 4's campaign that wasn't dropped after a single season.
You. I like you.
Campaign just didn't seem that interesting to me..also didn't have much replay value.

Random Note: Personally I think they introduced The Didact in a rather "anti-climatic" way, and "killed" him off in an equally lame way. I know The Didact ain't dead, so don't yell at me.
Halo's campaign is far from dead. It's just that the game has been out for over a year and most people have already played through the campaign by now. Halo 4 also has a smaller population, and does not feature co-op campaign on Matchmaking.

Multiplayer modes receives updates while campaign does not.
The campaign was okay. I thought the jumping through portals thing was kind of a cheap way of doing things. Also the pelicans don't actually hold any marines anymore. No theater no scoring. I like the intractable things. The Prometheans aren't really all that interesting to fight for whatever reason. There is a logical problem with the distance chief covers when he just walks to infinity. I mean they should have like had another level there or something I think. Heck could have been a driving section to get to the infinity.
The Halo 4 Forums is usually where the Multiplayer talk is. And on occassion, Spartan Ops gameplay talk. In short, Halo 4 Forums is where the gameplay elements are talked about.

The Halo Universe Forums is where the talk about Halo 4's story, Spartan Ops's story, and Halo's story's future is at. That's where you want to be at if you want to discuss Halo 4's story.
Halo 4's campaign was linear and boring. I still go back and play the campaigns from Halo 3 / Reach. I like the graphics from 4 but would rather have the open environments of 3 / Reach. Even 3 years in I'm still finding new ways to beat levels on Reach (just last night I got the Warthog with the Gauss canon into the sword base where there are two hunters - I forget the name of the mission but it's the one after Winter Contingency). I never have that feeling with Halo 4.

I'm hoping with the Xbox One they will be able to have more open non-linear environments due to more processing power.

As a side note I would like them do something like ODST and have you control a few different people during the campaign. Maybe something a la GTA V where you could switch between people during a mission who would have different skills / powers giving more variety for replay.
Quote:
Halo 4's campaign was linear and boring. I still go back and play the campaigns from Halo 3 / Reach. I like the graphics from 4 but would rather have the open environments of 3 / Reach. Even 3 years in I'm still finding new ways to beat levels on Reach (just last night I got the Warthog with the Gauss canon into the sword base where there are two hunters - I forget the name of the mission but it's the one after Winter Contingency). I never have that feeling with Halo 4.

I'm hoping with the Xbox One they will be able to have more open non-linear environments due to more processing power.

As a side note I would like them do something like ODST and have you control a few different people during the campaign. Maybe something a la GTA V where you could switch between people during a mission who would have different skills / powers giving more variety for replay.
Not really. Actually, it had me on the edge of my seat for what would happen next, as did Reach and ODST.
im glad you liked it but for me it was terribly boring and the levels being the most linear of the series isnt even up for debate.

i played the campaign once and never touched it again which is unheard of seeing as how i buy halo for the campaign and typically play at least a few levels from the prior games every single day. this is the only halo i never played through again at least like a dozen times in the first few months.
To be honest with you, I think people are looking for answers in all the wrong places.

Having been a huge fan of the series since the original, I can safely say that Halo 4 is a solid game with excellent gameplay and a lasting story. It as the open-world elements of Halo CE while also having the cinematic quality of Halo 2. Seriously, you can watch this game as one long movie and it's STILL entertaining!

So why the decrease in traffic?

Personally, I still hold tight to the belief that the franchise's change of hands is what did it. Think about it. For over a decade, Halo fans called the Bungie forums "home". You could spend hours on those forums, and the topics were constantly growing. In fact, I once did a class project on the Bungie forums and their popularity. You could literally refresh the page every 60 seconds and have a entirely new set of topics on the front page back in the days of Halo 3. Having the Bungie staff also actively contributing to forum conversations was also a major player in the popularity factor.

So if you're a long time member of their forums (especially if you obtained the titled of "Exalted Mythic Member" like I did), pulling up stakes and moving elsewhere can be a challenge for any diehard fan. At that point, we became a divided community, and both sites felt the blow of what I tend to call the "Great Halo Schism".
Quote:
Did we know what the prometheans were? No, did we know what requiems purpose was? No, did we know the did acts plan? No, I'd say there was some mystery to it, since we had to find out all that stuff though gameplay and exploration.
Actually, all of that was known if you read/listened to the Forerunner Saga books.
Quote:
Quote:
Did we know what the prometheans were? No, did we know what requiems purpose was? No, did we know the did acts plan? No, I'd say there was some mystery to it, since we had to find out all that stuff though gameplay and exploration.
Actually, all of that was known if you read/listened to the Forerunner Saga books.
Which you shouldn't have to do.
I'll probably get blasted for this but I have to break the campaign into two components to discuss it. Storywise I was happy with anything that got masterchief out of his coffin in space but honestly I had expected the story to turn a little more epic than it did.
As far as the play of the campaign, and this is the part were grenades will probably fly, after I finished the campaign in less than a day I realized that 343 put it in there as nothing more than a training aid so the war gamers would have a chance to practice with all the nifty new gadgets and guns without having to 'damage' their leaderboard ratings by fumbling through their first couple matches.
Okay..

To me Halo 4 was great, given that it wasn't made by Bungie. Even if it was made by Bungie I don't see how it regressed in any way. So many people say "Oh , Halo 2 was better" so on and so forth. Back then Halo 2 was the best of it's kind, therefore there was a lot of hype around it and a lot of people played and enjoyed it. But since the 360, call of duty and such has stepped on the scene. 343 did the right thing in order to keep my favorite game franchise alive.

To those of you complaining the campaign is linear: In my opinion, the ONLY Halo campaign who's whole campaign wasn't "linear" is Halo 3:ODST and that was only playing as The Rookie. I understand that Combat Evolved had "The Silent Cartographer" level and I haven't played Reach but that's just one mission. So tell me, how is Halo 4 so different.

The campaign in my eyes: I think 343 Industries did a hell of a good job. They told a great story. Best voice acting I've ever seen on the Halo franchise and the cut scenes were superb. They made me realize just how deep the connection was between Cortana and John. You finally see that John is not all war machine, he's actually a human and Cortana being fragmented from Dr. Halsey has inherited feelings. Actually cares about Master Chief. If you watched what people have been asking for(A Halo Movie/Show), Forward Unto Dawn series, you would understand the connection between Chief and Thomas Lasky. Although I do wish he was used more in the story but maybe he'll play a bigger role in future titles. But the last thing I loved about the campaign was how much info they tried to squeeze into it. First off the hidden terminal that sums up the prior Halos in the first mission. Although it wasn't that detailed it was an attempt at introducing newcomers to the game's storyline. Another thing is that they did what other Halos in the core series didn't: They explained who the forerunners were. Which is great given that many people don't bother reading the books. The landscape was beautiful, I don't know what you guys are talking about with the uninspired environment. I enjoyed the beauty of Halo 4, it really had my lost within the game sometimes.

Why Is Multiplayer storming over campaign now?: Well that's an easy question to answer. In this age of gaming it's not enough to just have a strong campaign and nothing else. That is not what the top sellers are doing to be so successful. The key is making something that people will come back to play again and again. You're not going to play a campaign for 2 years until the next title is released, you're going to play online against other people where it's a different unpredictable experience to you nearly every match. Why do they make ranking systems, unlockable items? If you think they do it just because it's a challenge mechanic, you're wrong. They do it because it keeps you playing, you keep working to get up to that top rank and unlock all the equipment you want to use. Like Call of Duty for example: I would have never went tenth prestige in Black Ops one if it wasn't for the fact that I could get gold guns. Then also new ways to play with DLC. Not only does Halo 4 keep you playing but it offers the classic Halo game modes as well as new ones such as Ricochet and it's very enjoyable with friends. I even dare to say that it trumps over Halo 2's multiplayer with the way it feels and plays. Does it have flaws? Well of course, but let's hope that 343 takes initiative to fix the problems before we complain about them again on the next installment on the franchise.

But all in all, I'd just like to say that I'm not losing interest in the campaign. I don't think anyone is, it's just that multiplayer has been transformed into something major so 343's budget will be able to compete with TreyArc/InfinityWard and DICE. They more money they have, hopefully, the better games they make. Can't say the same for CoD though.
To me Halo 4's campaign was the most stand out feature it had. The writing was good on any par you care to use and at the very least it felt very theatrical and engaging, more so than any other game I've played including those who do NOTHING but try to be "theatrical."

That said the gameplay did suffer and only on the point of, well it's Halo. The types of encounters we had in this game weren't that far removed from any others we've seen except for the broadsword segment and final area. Coupled with the usual linearity we've seen since Halo 2 and you don't have something that's, today, very replayable.

It's pretty much just another sign that 343 needs to -Yoink- convention and try to deliver a new type of Halo. They may polish and hone on every other front but Halo 5 and 6 are going to be painfully limited if they can't deliver fresh gameplay.
I think Halo CE had everything right, it set up the standards of what I want in a Halo game. After all the thrill of playing a new Halo wore off, I was kinda lukewarm to Halo 2 but ended up liking it increasingly more with time. It's probably my second favourite Halo game and I think it innovated the series in a right way. A lot more story was told, the split campaign, the cinematics were still well made and didn't fall into cheesy movie-type cinematics like Halo 3 (occasionally) and 4 did (in a more aggravating manner). I think my biggest complain with Halo 2's campaign is how they cut two missions out, well they just didn't make them.

Halo 3 did fairly well too. It did some nice innovation, particularly with the Scarab fights, and still had some pretty huge and long missions with the steady pacing that I liked so much from the franchise. But, some missions did suffer from a too fast pacing like Sierra 117 or Cortana for example. Some cinematics were also unnecessary and felt too movie like, taking you out of the game, particularly the last cinematic. I'm in the opinion that cinematics in video games are supposed to be quite different in nature than in movies. For one, if you don't show the main character or one of the main ones, they should be shown within seconds. You play in the shoes of that main character, they are your link into the game. If you show a cinematic without MC or the Arbiter (for Halo 2) close, you feel like watching a movie rather than being part of a video game universe. Immersion is one of the most important aspects of video games. So no fancy camera tricks either, the camera should be relatively steady up to a certain point. That's a problem I had with Halo 3's last cinematic in particular. That, and it just shows too much. I don't want everything to be shown or explained to me, it was completely unnecessary and often lets place for an underwhelming conclusion, as in Halo 3. Last big problem in Halo 3: how the hell did the Arbiter went from having him playable for half of Halo 2's campaign to merely being an occasional sidekick with barely any influence in the story? The conclusion to his story Ark was pretty underwhelming.

ODST was very welcomed and nice. As far as the missions themselves are concerned, they were not that great. They were nice but felt a bit like cheapened versions of experiences we already had. The missions were kinda short so the Halo ''formula'' was more apparent and felt a bit lacking. Nonetheless, there were some quite neat bits and the overall pace of the game was very well done. I really like the hub city, walking by night and piecing together what happened since the beginning of the day before. I was always fond of these ''you wake up after everything happened and walk around trying to figure out what happened''. And I was also always very fond of these ''occurring over a single day (or two)'' games, it feels pretty damn immersive and epic to a certain way to me. The cinematic style was also very restrained and really made you feel like in the feet of that particular ODST. The drop at the beginning was particularly nice, it didn't just last 2 seconds, you felt like you were crashing down from orbit.

Reach did a lot of things right and others wrong. For one, it fixed the problem I had with some Halo 3 cinematics. Gone were the movie-like ones, back to a more simplitic one following the protagonists. It had a somewhat Halo CE feel. Well, the game had a pretty nice Halo CE feel in a lot of aspects. But I think my biggest complain with the game and one that I feel highly disappointed towards, is the reckless pacing. Even if the cinematics feel more video game-like, I almost felt like playing an interactive movie at moments. A couple of missions had the optimal ''Halo pacing'', like Nightfall or New Alexandria for example, but a lot of them had such short segments that it was truly bothering, a lot more than these couple of fast bits in Halo 3.

For one, Winter Contingency is just so short... It's the first contact mission, we should be stressed about the situation and trying to defend ourselves, find people and organize something. The environment was a pretty cool one too. After the contact we just ride around a bit, defend a base and clear it in a matter of minutes. It should have been a bit like the Halo mission in CE. The environment was nice too and you had time to walk around and be immersed while trying to organize a resistance. Same problem with ONI Sword Base (why is the interior bit so damn short?) and Long Night of Solace? We clear the beach AND the launch base in a matter of minutes... And then the Covenant vessel segment is disappointingly short too. Truth and Reconciliation had it right. You took quite a bit of time to get underneath the ship and clear the gravity lift, only to have you wandering around the ship trying to find the captain and getting out. Part of the reason the mission was so damn fun is in its length, it feels all the more epic. In Reach, it feels like it's nothing. Heck, it's also part of why Halo CE was so good: it felt epic. And one way of achieving this, is to have truly big and long missions, to make you sweat a lot on them, intertwine it with a good dose of storytelling and make you feel like you truly are progressing. It's also why missions like The Ark and Covenant in Halo 3 are so enjoyable and rewarding.

Last thing about Reach, other than the couple of very neat and innovating bits like in Long Night of Solace or the Falcon thing in New Alexandria, Reach is basically a step backward in level design and scale. There's not a lot of big areas and if they are a step up it's not by much. It's basically the very same experience but prettier. There's not even a scarab fight like in Halo 3. Hell, level design wise, Halo 3 was more impressive! It achieved more to step up from the past game. The Sabre fight and Falcon thing are just different ways of doing things, it's not amping up the core Halo experience, which is something every new game in a franchise should do.

Now Halo 4 is a weird one. On one hand it really manages to fix Reach's problem on the scaling thing: longer missions which truly give you a sense of progression and immersion. On the other hand, it steps back in terms of cinematics (and story telling) to give a more movie-like experience. I thought the very first cinematic was abysmal. Incredibly cheesy and gave me shivers of embarrassment. Like most bits between Cortana and Chief... I wanted to close my eyes and put my hands on my ears. (there's also the Halo 4 title appearing after the first mission, like in movies... but it's a game...)

So, the missions themselves are kinda well done, go back to the pacing and Halo experience I like but they are not without their problems. First, the new enemies and weapons are incredibly boring, they are not fun to fight. They're not particularly original either, they feel like they're from the Mass Effect universe and the fights are incredibly bland. Kill the engineer-type robots, headshot the small ones and keep the big baddies for last. Really, the moment you get the recipe you'll notice that if you diverge from it the experience is more frustrating than fun. Second and quite important thing, there's no innovation at all. It feels like doing Halo CE all over again. Well the story truly is equivalent, but there's nothing Halo 4 does to build on top of the core Halo experience, nothing.
I don't think I have ever completed a Campaign for Halo. Maybe Halo 1 but I may be confusing that with Marathon. Even then, I played only Marathon 1 all the way through. Campaign just doesn't interest me in the least. I find them too hard and they take up too much of my time.
I'd say the campaign is dead. IMO it was actually really boring and didn't seem like a 'Halo' story. I guess alot of players are like me and didn't find it enjoyable.
Quote:
To those of you complaining the campaign is linear: In my opinion, the ONLY Halo campaign who's whole campaign wasn't "linear" is Halo 3:ODST and that was only playing as The Rookie. I understand that Combat Evolved had "The Silent Cartographer" level and I haven't played Reach but that's just one mission. So tell me, how is Halo 4 so different.
You're right, but I think the problem is how some define linear. If linear just means you have to go to point A then B then C in that order, then yes, all Halo games have been pretty linear. But I think in this case, linear just means that when you get to point B, you have to follow steps 1, 2, and then 3 in order to proceed. You have very little wiggle room in how you accomplish your objective.

As an example, towards the end of the mission Forerunner, you have to destroy 3 power cores. You can destroy them in any order you like and you have the choice to use a Banshee, a Ghost, or just go on foot. You still have to accomplish the objective, but there are multiple ways to do so. That's non-linearity.
Any sort of rpg campaign is going to be linear to a degree because essentially your going to be acting out a story that a writer has already written beginning, middle, and end.
Moving from one checkpoint to another is going to be linear travel and that happens in all the Halo games.
The aggravation factor or loss of intrest in the campaign for me came from, how you achieved getting from point A to point B was being micro-managed by the developers in what they gave you to work with.
In some area's they decided it was your ball game and dropped a dumptruck load of assets for you to play around with, but in other areas they had a specific pattarn in mind for the way you had to play things and it showed in what they expected you to do and what they expected you to do it with.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2