Skip to main content

Forums / Community / General Discussion

Halo 6 the next Halo 3?

OP Anastasius33

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3
Halo 5's base gameplay is absolutely great. It's the lack of content (even now after all the updates) that ruins it.
I love how they did the campaign in H5 with the two teams of Spartans. Obviously in 6 I hope they go that route again, only make it more of a 50/50 split between the two fireteams and not have it so Osiris based. That was a big disappointment for me with 5.
i think in halo 6
◾more old/new weapons
◾expand campaing
◾don't make it mission can't you fire, I mean... Only speak with another marines
◾more time using the vehicles
◾split screen in a same xbox, maybe just only 2 players
◾and more graphics because we are talking about HALO... A hard game in this times
Great analogy OP. I never realized it, but 343 is mirroring Bungie pretty heavily.

This post also makes me wonder what forums (if any) were like between the release of Halo 2 and 3. I wonder if people complained as much online as we do now.
Quote:
Halo CE was acclaimed primarily for its masterpiece of a campaign, proving that FPS games can be about more than just killing things. However, critics thought the multiplayer was rough and needed improvement.
Quote:
Halo 4: Acclaimed for its storytelling and development of Chief's and Cortana's personalities, but criticized by the fans for its mp and poor forge system.
Sure, there probably were critics who "thought the multiplayer [of Halo CE] was rough and needed improvement" because there are such critics for every game and it's something that could be said about every Halo ever. You might as well also bring up the fact that both games have a green protagonist who shoots aliens.

Quote:
Halo 2 was initially criticized for the direction of its campaign primarily because half the time we were not playing as Chief, misleading ads, and because it had a cliffhanger ending (sound familiar?). While it was always popular, H2 took time to become the fan favorite it is today.
Quote:
Halo 5: Acclaimed for its mp and forge, but criticized over time split between Chief and Locke, misleading ads, and a cliff hanger ending.
Speaking of "rough and needing improvement" being true for any game, the Halo 2 multiplayer was glitchy, and was criticized for "noob friendly" gameplay. Mind you Halo 5 wasn't really "acclaimed" for its multiplayer either. It's more that it just happens to be more likeable than its predecessor, which isn't much of an accomplishment. Either way, there seems to be a confilict in your analogy here: Halo 2 multiplayer was considered worse than its predecessor in terms of gameplay mechanics, whereas Halo 5 was considered better than its predecessor.

Quote:
Halo 3 was critically acclaimed for the improvements made to mp as well as the addition of forge. While the campaign met some criticism (partially, interestingly enough, because now we didn't get to play as the Arbiter) and for being short, it was also praised for its emphasis on Chief and Cortana's relationship and it's giving more development to them as characters.
Halo 3 certainly wasn't "critically acclaimed" for its "improvements" to the multiplayer. More precise would be to say that Halo 3 fixed all the glitches from Halo 2 while really fixing none of the gameplay issues and adding unwanted mechanics like BR spread. I find it difficult to think of anything in Halo 3 gameplay that would be improved from Halo 2 that isn't a bug fix.

Overall, sure, if you're vague enough and say what you want to believe, you can draw parallels between anything. However, personally, I fail to see any parallel between the original trilogy and 343i's work.
Only way this will happen is if they truly learn to listen and bring back everything missing. Plus more, since every halo until 4 had more and more.

But what they have to bring back is
  • Playable elites
  • Nearly 40 game modes
  • More old weapons... I think they actually learned this lesson.
  • Some old covonent vehicles to add more depth to the game. We currently have like 7 human vehicles and only 3 covonent...
  • There's probably plenty more...
this would mean a return of the spectre...i really loved that thing in halo 2...its basically a hog with boost and an extra passenger seat, so not technically a reskin and thus not obsolete....wish they add it in halo 6.

while they are at it, we could probably finally have and use a shadow troop carrier in multiplayer (those things in the outskirts level of halo 2)
Dude I've been praying the shadow will return one day, it was such an underate vehicle... I also think the spectre and revenant should be the ones added, the prowler was just kinda wierd since it couldn't strafe...
ikr? maybe give it some kinda shielded canopy to protect the passengers since they are sitting ducks in gametypes like warzone where anyone can spawn snipes
Great analogy OP. I never realized it, but 343 is mirroring Bungie pretty heavily.

This post also makes me wonder what forums (if any) were like between the release of Halo 2 and 3. I wonder if people complained as much online as we do now.
I'm not sure when Waypoint was started (I think 2009?). But yes, it would have been interesting to compare them (had they existed) with the current posts and see if anything had really changed.
tsassi wrote:
Quote:
Halo CE was acclaimed primarily for its masterpiece of a campaign, proving that FPS games can be about more than just killing things. However, critics thought the multiplayer was rough and needed improvement.
Quote:
Halo 4: Acclaimed for its storytelling and development of Chief's and Cortana's personalities, but criticized by the fans for its mp and poor forge system.
Sure, there probably were critics who "thought the multiplayer [of Halo CE] was rough and needed improvement" because there are such critics for every game and it's something that could be said about every Halo ever. You might as well also bring up the fact that both games have a green protagonist who shoots aliens.

Quote:
Halo 2 was initially criticized for the direction of its campaign primarily because half the time we were not playing as Chief,misleading ads, and because it had a cliffhanger ending (sound familiar?). While it was always popular, H2 took time to become the fan favorite it is today.
Quote:
Halo 5: Acclaimed for its mp and forge, but criticized over time split between Chief and Locke, misleading ads, and a cliff hanger ending.
Speaking of "rough and needing improvement" being true for any game, the Halo 2 multiplayer was glitchy, and was criticized for "noob friendly" gameplay. Mind you Halo 5 wasn't really "acclaimed" for its multiplayer either. It's more that it just happens to be more likeable than its predecessor, which isn't much of an accomplishment. Either way, there seems to be a confilict in your analogy here: Halo 2 multiplayer was considered worse than its predecessor in terms of gameplay mechanics, whereas Halo 5 was considered better than its predecessor.

Quote:
Halo 3 was critically acclaimed for the improvements made to mp as well as the addition of forge. While the campaign met some criticism (partially, interestingly enough, because now we didn't get to play as the Arbiter) and for being short, it was also praised for its emphasis on Chief and Cortana's relationship and it's giving more development to them as characters.
Halo 3 certainly wasn't "critically acclaimed" for its "improvements" to the multiplayer. More precise would be to say that Halo 3 fixed all the glitches from Halo 2 while really fixing none of the gameplay issues and adding unwanted mechanics like BR spread. I find it difficult to think of anything in Halo 3 gameplay that would be improved from Halo 2 that isn't a bug fix.

Overall, sure, if you're vague enough and say what you want to believe, you can draw parallels between anything. However, personally, I fail to see any parallel between the original trilogy and 343i's
Based on what I've read, it was not just some critics, but the majority of critics who considered CE's mp faulty.

As far as H2's mp is concerned, yes there were problems, but that didn't stop from being on of the most played games in the series. Even the forums are full of comments about wishes to return to H2's mp. Plus, there's still the parallel with both games having significantly misleading ads.
For Halo 3, if I recall correctly, Bungie added a lot of new gametypes to the mp, which I'm sure doesn't count as a bug fix.

In the end, we're all entitled to our own opinions. If my comparison of Bungie's and 343's work still doesn't make sense, that's fine. Agree to disagree.
If the keep the gameplay, but patch up the gaps in the story of Halo 5 - Halo 6 will be great.
Still waiting for halo 3 anniversary
Nooga wrote:
Success wise: absolutely
MP gameplay wise: dear god no
are you serious the multiplayer gameplay is near perfect.
Yes this
Here's my premise:

Halo CE was acclaimed primarily for its masterpiece of a campaign, proving that FPS games can be about more than just killing things. However, critics thought the multiplayer was rough and needed improvement.

Halo 2 was initially criticized for the direction of its campaign primarily because half the time we were not playing as Chief,misleading ads, and because it had a cliffhanger ending (sound familiar?). While it was always popular, H2 took time to become the fan favorite it is today.

Halo 3 was critically acclaimed for the improvements made to mp as well as the addition of forge. While the campaign met some criticism (partially, interestingly enough, because now we didn't get to play as the Arbiter) and for being short, it was also praised for its emphasis on Chief and Cortana's relationship and it's giving more development to them as characters.

Now for the 343 era...

Halo 4: Acclaimed for its storytelling and development of Chief's and Cortana's personalities, but criticized by the fans for its mp and poor forge system.

Halo 5: Acclaimed for its mp and forge, but criticized over time split between Chief and Locke, misleading ads, and a cliff hanger ending.

I think 343 has big boots to fill in moving forward with the franchise, but seeing the way they took feedback on multiplayer after H4, I can't help but feel at least fairly confident that they will respond in kind when it comes to how they handle the campaign as they make Halo 6. Here's to hoping they can do it come 2018!
It's a cliffhanger ending because it's the middle of a trilogy, of course we weren't getting closure.

If they get rid of bullet magnetism and add full scale battles w/o reqs to use (and removal of the system entirely) it would gain widespread renown and possibly able to be recognized competitively.
tsassi wrote:
Quote:
Halo CE was acclaimed primarily for its masterpiece of a campaign, proving that FPS games can be about more than just killing things. However, critics thought the multiplayer was rough and needed improvement.
Quote:
Halo 4: Acclaimed for its storytelling and development of Chief's and Cortana's personalities, but criticized by the fans for its mp and poor forge system.
Sure, there probably were critics who "thought the multiplayer [of Halo CE] was rough and needed improvement" because there are such critics for every game and it's something that could be said about every Halo ever. You might as well also bring up the fact that both games have a green protagonist who shoots aliens.

Quote:
Halo 2 was initially criticized for the direction of its campaign primarily because half the time we were not playing as Chief,misleading ads, and because it had a cliffhanger ending (sound familiar?). While it was always popular, H2 took time to become the fan favorite it is today.
Quote:
Halo 5: Acclaimed for its mp and forge, but criticized over time split between Chief and Locke, misleading ads, and a cliff hanger ending.
Speaking of "rough and needing improvement" being true for any game, the Halo 2 multiplayer was glitchy, and was criticized for "noob friendly" gameplay. Mind you Halo 5 wasn't really "acclaimed" for its multiplayer either. It's more that it just happens to be more likeable than its predecessor, which isn't much of an accomplishment. Either way, there seems to be a confilict in your analogy here: Halo 2 multiplayer was considered worse than its predecessor in terms of gameplay mechanics, whereas Halo 5 was considered better than its predecessor.

Quote:
Halo 3 was critically acclaimed for the improvements made to mp as well as the addition of forge. While the campaign met some criticism (partially, interestingly enough, because now we didn't get to play as the Arbiter) and for being short, it was also praised for its emphasis on Chief and Cortana's relationship and it's giving more development to them as characters.
Halo 3 certainly wasn't "critically acclaimed" for its "improvements" to the multiplayer. More precise would be to say that Halo 3 fixed all the glitches from Halo 2 while really fixing none of the gameplay issues and adding unwanted mechanics like BR spread. I find it difficult to think of anything in Halo 3 gameplay that would be improved from Halo 2 that isn't a bug fix.

Overall, sure, if you're vague enough and say what you want to believe, you can draw parallels between anything. However, personally, I fail to see any parallel between the original trilogy and 343i's
Based on what I've read, it was not just some critics, but the majority of critics who considered CE's mp faulty.

As far as H2's mp is concerned, yes there were problems, but that didn't stop from being on of the most played games in the series. Even the forums are full of comments about wishes to return to H2's mp. Plus, there's still the parallel with both games having significantly misleading ads.
For Halo 3, if I recall correctly, Bungie added a lot of new gametypes to the mp, which I'm sure doesn't count as a bug fix.

In the end, we're all entitled to our own opinions. If my comparison of Bungie's and 343's work still doesn't make sense, that's fine. Agree to disagree.
Halo 3 just fixed the bugs man, and it made us slower, don't see what it added to mp tbh.
I love how they did the campaign in H5 with the two teams of Spartans. Obviously in 6 I hope they go that route again, only make it more of a 50/50 split between the two fireteams and not have it so Osiris based. That was a big disappointment for me with 5.
It should just be with Chief and pals, considering it's apart of the trilogy and not a spin-off, otherwise there's no suspense as to what the teams are planning against each other unless 343 decides to not show us at random intervals, and that's just lame.
Nooga wrote:
Nooga wrote:
Success wise: absolutely
MP gameplay wise: dear god no
are you serious the multiplayer gameplay is near perfect.
If i want to play "Halo: 3 (Turtle Simulator 2007)" ill do it on MCC. Or ill flood a factory with knee high syrup and grab some friends to play paintball in.

Spoiler:
Show

Don't forget the poor hit detection and useless equipment!
Still waiting for halo 3 anniversary
I'm sure it's coming. 343 will do anything for a quick buck.
Only way this will happen is if they truly learn to listen and bring back everything missing. Plus more, since every halo until 4 had more and more.

But what they have to bring back is
  • Playable elites
  • Nearly 40 game modes
  • More old weapons... I think they actually learned this lesson.
  • Some old covonent vehicles to add more depth to the game. We currently have like 7 human vehicles and only 3 covonent...
  • There's probably plenty more...
Nearly 40 game modes! Why would the bring back 40 game modes. It would benefit nobody. There are like 3 that are missing the rest can stay hidden in whatever dusty hard drive they're sitting in
Rowanblade wrote:
Only way this will happen is if they truly learn to listen and bring back everything missing. Plus more, since every halo until 4 had more and more.

But what they have to bring back is
  • Playable elites
  • Nearly 40 game modes
  • More old weapons... I think they actually learned this lesson.
  • Some old covonent vehicles to add more depth to the game. We currently have like 7 human vehicles and only 3 covonent...
  • There's probably plenty more...
Nearly 40 game modes! Why would the bring back 40 game modes. It would benefit nobody. There are like 3 that are missing the rest can stay hidden in whatever dusty hard drive they're sitting in
Well, it's a good idea, they release the game with 40 game modes to see which are the most populated, and cut that number between 20 and 25, and even more than that as the game ages and playerbase shrinks.

Adding back all the vehicles ever would be nice too, vehicles are so fun in Halo.
Rowanblade wrote:
Only way this will happen is if they truly learn to listen and bring back everything missing. Plus more, since every halo until 4 had more and more.

But what they have to bring back is

    • Playable elites
    • Nearly 40 game modes
    • More old weapons... I think they actually learned this lesson.
    • Some old covonent vehicles to add more depth to the game. We currently have like 7 human vehicles and only 3 covonent...
    • There's probably plenty more...
Nearly 40 game modes! Why would the bring back 40 game modes. It would benefit nobody. There are like 3 that are missing the rest can stay hidden in whatever dusty hard drive they're sitting in
We want those 40 game modes because they're fun and beloved by most fans who unlike you have been playing Halo since the early days.
Here's my premise:

Halo CE was acclaimed primarily for its masterpiece of a campaign, proving that FPS games can be about more than just killing things. However, critics thought the multiplayer was rough and needed improvement.

Halo 2 was initially criticized for the direction of its campaign primarily because half the time we were not playing as Chief,misleading ads, and because it had a cliffhanger ending (sound familiar?). While it was always popular, H2 took time to become the fan favorite it is today.

Halo 3 was critically acclaimed for the improvements made to mp as well as the addition of forge. While the campaign met some criticism (partially, interestingly enough, because now we didn't get to play as the Arbiter) and for being short, it was also praised for its emphasis on Chief and Cortana's relationship and it's giving more development to them as characters.

Now for the 343 era...

Halo 4: Acclaimed for its storytelling and development of Chief's and Cortana's personalities, but criticized by the fans for its mp and poor forge system.

Halo 5: Acclaimed for its mp and forge, but criticized over time split between Chief and Locke, misleading ads, and a cliff hanger ending.

I think 343 has big boots to fill in moving forward with the franchise, but seeing the way they took feedback on multiplayer after H4, I can't help but feel at least fairly confident that they will respond in kind when it comes to how they handle the campaign as they make Halo 6. Here's to hoping they can do it come 2018!
Considering Halo 2 has one of the longest campaigns and Halo 5 has the shortest campaign I don't see this as an appropriate comparison.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3