Forums / Community / General Discussion

Why has Halo lost its edge?

OP BobTheSlug

I'm not going to rant about the multiplayer, or the gameplay, or the art style, or the lack of quality in the UI. Instead I'm going to shed some light on something that should be obvious. What gives art depth? What gives poetry a soul? what makes films deep and inspirational? its not something as simple as CGI, imagery, or the amount of obscure metaphors that the writer can cram onto the paper. Its the theme!
The goal of any competent writing team is/should be to make the consumer feel something. They want us to go into the game thinking "Let's shoot some aliens!" and have us finish the campaign in either tears, or with our jaws being dirtied on the floor. They had it right with Halo 4, the ending made everyone cry, and it created a HUGE emotional response! and had it not been for the poorly designed multiplayer and gameplay of Halo 4, then the community would have agreed that the campaign was one of the best in the series! (second only to Halo 3). Halo 3 was also on the right track, the endless quest to rescue the girl and save humanity was brilliant! and the loss and the sacrifice endured by the characters was inspirational (Which was only damaged by the 2 dimensional characters of H3).

Another way to think of it is that if you could write a novelised version of the campaign of a game exactly the same as it was told in the game and have a coherent and well written story by the conclusion, then the writers of the game were 1000% successful with their efforts.

However, this does bring up the secondary risk of this theory. If a writer attempts to write the game as if it were a book, then it would be SOOOOOO boring. It would just be endless plot and continuous talking that required the gamers' undivided attention. To counteract this, it's important to recognise that while thhe plot must be deep and meaningful, the gameplay has to live up to the same standard, this is the ONLY REASON Halo 3s campaign is so universally loved. The writers wrote campaign with the themes of Love (Rescuing cortana), Brotherhood (Arbiter and the Chief), Sacrifice (Miranda and Johnson dying to save the universe). The writers did this while also realising and appreciating that whenever anything awesome or cool happened in a cutscene, the player MUST have entire control over the character (The warthog run couldve been an awesome cutscene, but instead we all have fond memories of driving around to the tune of -Yoink- music destroying aliens and saving the universe). This is most evident with Halo 5 (The biggest plot blunder in franchise history), remember that cutscene of blue team being chased by Locke and Osiris? Imagine what would have happened if the player got to chase the master chief themself! And run frantically through a moving obstacle course near a waking guardian surrounded by lava? It could've been the 343i equivalent to the warthog run! Or what about the cutscene where Locke dives off of the space elevator to get into the pelican? What if the player was able to dive off the landing pad and get to it, instead of just watching a mediocre character do it.

In other words, its like shoving the most delicious cake in the player's face and saying "Watch me eat it! its delicious!"
"But how am i supposed to know?"
"Because its delicious!"
The whole moral compass of making a fun campaign should be the phrase "Have the cake and eat it too". LET US HAVE THE CAKE AND EAT IT TOO! Don't tease us with how cool something looks, and then don't let us experience it for ourselves!

Fix this problem I've outlined, and almost EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM WILL BE FIXED.
The campaign will be more enjoyable,
The story will be more emotional,
The "We Hate 343i!" people will finally shut the hell up already.

(If you take this feedback onboard, then hell yeah you're awesome!)
Sadly Halo never will never be what it once was or half what it once was for that matter, I'm even finding it hard to believe that we'll ever see the deplementation of the req system or the removal of advanced mobility towards a more grounded or mixed multiplayer like the community wants due to microsoft and higher ups trying to appease the market by trying to make Halo into a fps that appeases the majority of the genre by being generic instead of standing out from the crowd. It was never 343s fault it was ms managers and the higher ups who call all the shots that ruined a inve great franchise, rant over.
Yeah, it did. I think Halo Reach is where it started to lose its edge, but Halo 4 is when it finally lost it.
It can get it back again. That's all that matters. We have to work toward that.
AXELNZ wrote:
Sadly Halo never will never be what it once was or half what it once was for that matter, I'm even finding it hard to believe that we'll ever see the deplementation of the req system or the removal of advanced mobility towards a more grounded or mixed multiplayer like the community wants due to microsoft and higher ups trying to appease the market by trying to make Halo into a fps that appeases the majority of the genre by being generic instead of standing out from the crowd. It was never 343s fault it was ms managers and the higher ups who call all the shots that ruined a inve great franchise, rant over.
I actually love the new 'enhanced' Spartans. Why wouldn't they sprint, and climb, if they could? You can't get up on that ledge? Just use your hands, Spartan, you're a grown man. Boost is also incredibly helpful. It's saved my life more times than I care to count. Mis-judged a ledge? Boost may save you. grenade at your feet? Boost may save you. At least it will limit the chances of you being hurt. It seems like a logical step in advanced combat, so why they would stop using it after it's proved to be so effective is beyond me.

As for the Spartan abilities, I genuinely believe they enhance combat and make you more on edge. More ways to attack, and more ways to be attacked. They're not always 1 hit kills either, and can easily be countered.

If people want more 'grounded' gameplay, it'd be nice to have playlists with those features removed, however I don't think I'll be playing them.

Personally, gameplay wise, I think Halo 5 is absolutely the best Halo yet. Fluid controls and framerates really help in that regard. Aiming down sights is also 'revolutionary' for Halo. I mean, it's common practise IRL but it makes gunplay seem so much easier for me. As for the story... it's... okay. It's not brilliant, but it's not horrible. It's just... okay.

People whine about it, but honestly I enjoyed it. I still think the best Halo campaign was Halo 2. If we could get a campaign of that scope and quality, with the graphics and gameplay of Halo 5, in newer titles, I think Halo will be amazing the next time around.

Also more Nathan Fillion.

Here's hoping.
Wow, I was ready to dismiss the OP as yet another whiny rant. Instead, I think BobtheSlug makes a really great well thought out point. There are some great moments, and hints of great ideas in Halo 5's narative, but they either werent fully developed (such Chief's detachment from Blue Team because of his grief over Cortana) or the writers pulled away before full commiting to something to risky ( Locke's Hunt for Chief). I feel the overall narrative could be salvaged if 343's writing staff learns from its misteps, and ties everything up intelligently in Halo 6. But boy, that really seems like too much to hope for given the sheer number of disappointing videogame stories recent.
I honestly believe that Halo 5 is not the game that 343i wanted to make and that maybe some Microsoft Execs and too much marketing management forced them to make a bunch of changes.
The teaser trailer and #hunt the truth were all hints of the story we were going to get. So what happened? The Xbox One launch. I think Microsoft had a very specific idea of what role they wanted their console to have (central media hub, online always, drm, Xbox Gold required) and they wanted Halo at the front of that push. So they either forced 343i to rush their development (which is why we had such huge chunks of the multiplayer not available at launch, online-only multiplayer and co-op, and a very different story than the #hunt the truth campaign) and/or have them adhere too much to some Microsoft marketing team.

Halo 4 is incredibly emotional, with a much better written John and Cortana and has a powerful ending. Even if some people don't like the story it told, Halo 4 still did a very good job of telling it. And, like other people have mentioned, Halo 5 does have quite a few moments that are really good and carry some of that emotion forward.

The good news in all of this? I don't think for a second that Halo is gone. There might have been a bit of a hiccup with 5 (I still think it's a very fun game) but Spencer is now in charge of Xbox, and 343i has all the time they need to make Halo 6 the game they want. Bonnie is doing a good job running 343i and I'm confident Halo 6 will be as good as Halo 4 (which remains my favorite Halo game).

The only thing Halo 4 was missing was a final boss fight. lol. 343i please bring more boss fights.
Because fighting Covenant all the time is getting boring,we need new enemies.
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
Sadly Halo never will never be what it once was or half what it once was for that matter, I'm even finding it hard to believe that we'll ever see the deplementation of the req system or the removal of advanced mobility towards a more grounded or mixed multiplayer like the community wants due to microsoft and higher ups trying to appease the market by trying to make Halo into a fps that appeases the majority of the genre by being generic instead of standing out from the crowd. It was never 343s fault it was ms managers and the higher ups who call all the shots that ruined a inve great franchise, rant over.
I actually love the new 'enhanced' Spartans. Why wouldn't they sprint, and climb, if they could? You can't get up on that ledge? Just use your hands, Spartan, you're a grown man. Boost is also incredibly helpful. It's saved my life more times than I care to count. Mis-judged a ledge? Boost may save you. grenade at your feet? Boost may save you. At least it will limit the chances of you being hurt. It seems like a logical step in advanced combat, so why they would stop using it after it's proved to be so effective is beyond me.

As for the Spartan abilities, I genuinely believe they enhance combat and make you more on edge. More ways to attack, and more ways to be attacked. They're not always 1 hit kills either, and can easily be countered.

If people want more 'grounded' gameplay, it'd be nice to have playlists with those features removed, however I don't think I'll be playing them.

Personally, gameplay wise, I think Halo 5 is absolutely the best Halo yet. Fluid controls and framerates really help in that regard. Aiming down sights is also 'revolutionary' for Halo. I mean, it's common practise IRL but it makes gunplay seem so much easier for me. As for the story... it's... okay. It's not brilliant, but it's not horrible. It's just... okay.

People whine about it, but honestly I enjoyed it. I still think the best Halo campaign was Halo 2. If we could get a campaign of that scope and quality, with the graphics and gameplay of Halo 5, in newer titles, I think Halo will be amazing the next time around.

Also more Nathan Fillion.

Here's hoping.
Your right, in that case my spartan should be able to tale off his helmet to or climb on walls, or peak, or combine thrusters to have insta lill punch, or be able to have their knife out permanently for insta kills, or wall run, why can't I wall run, i saw Buck do it in campaign? See my point, the lore shouldn't dictate the gameplay because it's realistic. By having advanced mobility you are limiting the naps the devs can make, instead of designing the maps around the stuff on the map you are designing them around the players ability to fly, leading to a point where all maps have the same play style leading to you hating all the maps or loving them. And don't get me started on what this mobility has done to every ground vehicle ever.
AXELNZ wrote:
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
Your right, in that case my spartan should be able to tale off his helmet to or climb on walls, or peak, or combine thrusters to have insta lill punch, or be able to have their knife out permanently for insta kills, or wall run, why can't I wall run, i saw Buck do it in campaign? See my point, the lore shouldn't dictate the gameplay because it's realistic. By having advanced mobility you are limiting the naps the devs can make, instead of designing the maps around the stuff on the map you are designing them around the players ability to fly, leading to a point where all maps have the same play style leading to you hating all the maps or loving them. And don't get me started on what this mobility has done to every ground vehicle ever.
Lore should absolutely dictate the gameplay, as long as it doesn't interfere with fun. For instance, we have energy based weapons because of the Covenant. We have the ability to sprint because it makes sense that you can do that, but also the new enemies dictate that the player needs more speed to combat them effectively. We have enhanced Spartans because of the UNSC striving to combat the Covenant and Forerunners. Of course the player can choose not to utilise these tools they are given, but that's either out of forgetfulness, for a challenge, or out of spite.

Sorry, but I don't really see what point you're trying to make. Taking off your helmet would make no sense because you're in combat all the time, you can already climb on walls, peeking would actually be pretty decent, that "thruster punch" you mentioned is the Spartan Charge, you can get instant kills with the knife anyway, but as a weapon it would perform the same way an Energy sword or Gravity Hammer does, so that's not even a bad idea, and as for the segment in the campaign where Buck ran on the wall, that was because he was running on the ground, which started to tilt, and he ran along it until gravity took over and he could no longer.

As for the design of the maps, I see that they've been designed with these new Spartan abilities in mind, but they are not tailored exclusively to them. You can still jog and jump around to get to high places, just like you could in previous Halo titles, and it doesn't make the map any less explorable or fun to play. It simply means that when you meet an enemy who is using their suit's full abilities, you will be a little outmatched. You can absolutely ignore this however, and play sneakily in order to assassinate enemies, or jog around so as to be constantly ready to fire at or stick any approaching enemies before they can stop sprinting in time.

As for the mobility's effects on ground vehicles, I'm not sure I understand your point. Spartans can reach a top speed of a little above average human speed; let's call it 15 MPH for argument's sake, whereas a Warthog can travel around 80 MPH, which certainly is a lot quicker. I know that I'd rather be driving across a big map than sprinting because it will take probably about 1/5 of the time to get there.

I don't mean to sound argumentative or rude but you've brought up a lot of points that don't really make much sense.
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
Your right, in that case my spartan should be able to tale off his helmet to or climb on walls, or peak, or combine thrusters to have insta lill punch, or be able to have their knife out permanently for insta kills, or wall run, why can't I wall run, i saw Buck do it in campaign? See my point, the lore shouldn't dictate the gameplay because it's realistic. By having advanced mobility you are limiting the naps the devs can make, instead of designing the maps around the stuff on the map you are designing them around the players ability to fly, leading to a point where all maps have the same play style leading to you hating all the maps or loving them. And don't get me started on what this mobility has done to every ground vehicle ever.Sorry, but I don't really see what point you're trying to make. Taking off your helmet would make no sense because you're in combat all the time, you can already climb on walls, peeking would actually be pretty decent, that "thruster punch" you mentioned is the Spartan Charge, you can get instant kills with the knife anyway, but as a weapon it would perform the same way an Energy sword or Gravity Hammer does, so that's not even a bad idea, and as for the segment in the campaign where Buck ran on the wall, that was because he was running on the ground, which started to tilt, and he ran along it until gravity took over and he could no longer.
Lore should absolutely dictate the gameplay, as long as it doesn't interfere with fun. For instance, we have energy based weapons because of the Covenant. We have the ability to sprint because it makes sense that you can do that, but also the new enemies dictate that the player needs more speed to combat them effectively. We have enhanced Spartans because of the UNSC striving to combat the Covenant and Forerunners. Of course the player can choose not to utilise these tools they are given, but that's either out of forgetfulness, for a challenge, or out of spite.

As for the design of the maps, I see that they've been designed with these new Spartan abilities in mind, but they are not tailored exclusively to them. You can still jog and jump around to get to high places, just like you could in previous Halo titles, and it doesn't make the map any less explorable or fun to play. It simply means that when you meet an enemy who is using their suit's full abilities, you will be a little outmatched. You can absolutely ignore this however, and play sneakily in order to assassinate enemies, or jog around so as to be constantly ready to fire at or stick any approaching enemies before they can stop sprinting in time.

As for the mobility's effects on ground vehicles, I'm not sure I understand your point. Spartans can reach a top speed of a little above average human speed; let's call it 15 MPH for argument's sake, whereas a Warthog can travel around 80 MPH, which certainly is a lot quicker. I know that I'd rather be driving across a big map than sprinting because it will take probably about 1/5 of the time to get there.

I don't mean to sound argumentative or rude but you've brought up a lot of points that don't really make much sense.
Lore behind pizza skins fries skins, teabagging, afking, req packs?
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
Your right, in that case my spartan should be able to tale off his helmet to or climb on walls, or peak, or combine thrusters to have insta lill punch, or be able to have their knife out permanently for insta kills, or wall run, why can't I wall run, i saw Buck do it in campaign? See my point, the lore shouldn't dictate the gameplay because it's realistic. By having advanced mobility you are limiting the naps the devs can make, instead of designing the maps around the stuff on the map you are designing them around the players ability to fly, leading to a point where all maps have the same play style leading to you hating all the maps or loving them. And don't get me started on what this mobility has done to every ground vehicle ever.
Lore should absolutely dictate the gameplay, as long as it doesn't interfere with fun. For instance, we have energy based weapons because of the Covenant. We have the ability to sprint because it makes sense that you can do that, but also the new enemies dictate that the player needs more speed to combat them effectively. We have enhanced Spartans because of the UNSC striving to combat the Covenant and Forerunners. Of course the player can choose not to utilise these tools they are given, but that's either out of forgetfulness, for a challenge, or out of spite.

Sorry, but I don't really see what point you're trying to make. Taking off your helmet would make no sense because you're in combat all the time, you can already climb on walls, peeking would actually be pretty decent, that "thruster punch" you mentioned is the Spartan Charge, you can get instant kills with the knife anyway, but as a weapon it would perform the same way an Energy sword or Gravity Hammer does, so that's not even a bad idea, and as for the segment in the campaign where Buck ran on the wall, that was because he was running on the ground, which started to tilt, and he ran along it until gravity took over and he could no longer.

As for the design of the maps, I see that they've been designed with these new Spartan abilities in mind, but they are not tailored exclusively to them. You can still jog and jump around to get to high places, just like you could in previous Halo titles, and it doesn't make the map any less explorable or fun to play. It simply means that when you meet an enemy who is using their suit's full abilities, you will be a little outmatched. You can absolutely ignore this however, and play sneakily in order to assassinate enemies, or jog around so as to be constantly ready to fire at or stick any approaching enemies before they can stop sprinting in time.

As for the mobility's effects on ground vehicles, I'm not sure I understand your point. Spartans can reach a top speed of a little above average human speed; let's call it 15 MPH for argument's sake, whereas a Warthog can travel around 80 MPH, which certainly is a lot quicker. I know that I'd rather be driving across a big map than sprinting because it will take probably about 1/5 of the time to get there.

I don't mean to sound argumentative or rude but you've brought up a lot of points that don't really make much sense.
Lore should only dictate gameplay to an extent, it becomes an issue when mechanics start to clash vs each other for "lore" or realism which is where it then becomes an obnoxious issue. The halo franchise wasn't even built off lore to begin with, Bungie has outright said they excluded it for so long cause they saw it as a crutch, it wasn't until most of the HCE/H2 developers were gone that sprint even became a strong(keyword on strong, cause they did test it in H2 but dumped it) consideration . Furthermore using lore and realism is such a flawed way for game design because much of it is hypocritical. Sure Spartans can sprint, but why are they not able to shoot and sprint at the same time? Something your average marine can do without a suit. To go even further, remember when I said lore is a bad excuse once mechanics start clashing with each other? The most common positive of sprint is "going fast! Cause anything that isn't H4 and 5 is to 'slow'". It's really not the only way to achieve speed, and honestly it really doesn't make you go faster anyways when you're having to constantly drop the animations upon engagement where as if you simply up the base movement speed, you can go just as fast AND still shoot at the same time and move in an Omni directional way, things sprint won't let you do. There's more realism out of that than sprint if you ask me and you're still adding what sprint does, but without the negatives.

"Of course the player can choose not to utilise these tools they are given, but that's either out of forgetfulness, for a challenge, or out of spite." you can bet people do dislike, but people have "adapted" as others would say they should. It doesn't make the abilities any more appealing. I know how everything works in this game, I can use them effectively, but I still despise the majority of it cause much of it is unnecessary, forced and clashes with various aspects of the game.

"As for the design of the maps, I see that they've been designed with these new Spartan abilities in mind, but they are not tailored exclusively to them. You can still jog and jump around to get to high places, just like you could in previous Halo titles" you're actually wrong on this. Top of truth mid you HAVE to use clambor if you want to get the power weapon. There's various areas on maps where specific abilities are a necessity regardless if one likes it or not. This creates a whole new issue as well. I already dislike how I'm exposed when clambering as I can't shoot back nor move in the process, instead I'll be half dead or less if I clambor. Pile that with making certain areas require the ability, and you add more frustration to it. It's just like telling someone not to use sprint if they dislike it so much. It would be a good idea, if you could still hit the power weapons before the other team or at the same time, but you can't, your own movement is hindered by choosing to ignore it. People handicapping themselves isn't a solution.

Im a little surprised how you're in support of the lore, but you don't know how fast a spartan can actually get, try around 35 MPH for an average but some could go over 40. Regardless I think his point on mobility and vehicles is vehicles actually aren't that much faster than you. You can outrun anything but a warthog, ghost and mongoose. Tanks are much easier to outrun and hijack, not to mention because of the increased Mobility, weapon magnetism has been raised extensively and most gunners and such are very weak and easy to take out because of that. It's hurt vehicle effectiveness and I see people use them less often out of fear of getting hijacked so easily or simply getting shot out of it with perfections. It's no joke on how easy it is to take a gunner out of a warthog because of the weapon magnetism compensating for increased mobility.
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
Your right, in that case my spartan should be able to tale off his helmet to or climb on walls, or peak, or combine thrusters to have insta lill punch, or be able to have their knife out permanently for insta kills, or wall run, why can't I wall run, i saw Buck do it in campaign? See my point, the lore shouldn't dictate the gameplay because it's realistic. By having advanced mobility you are limiting the naps the devs can make, instead of designing the maps around the stuff on the map you are designing them around the players ability to fly, leading to a point where all maps have the same play style leading to you hating all the maps or loving them. And don't get me started on what this mobility has done to every ground vehicle ever.
I get your points but I don't necessarily agree with them. You mentioned about Spartans being unable to sprint and shoot at the same time. If they could, it would be inaccurate, but also would lead to a lot of frustrations among the community. Therefore, in that situation, lore gets in the way of fun, as I said.

Your point about the sprinting and stopping vs running into combat; I'm not sure I follow. Yes, there is a momentary delay between exiting sprint and being able to fire your gun, but the time it takes to do so will not be longer than the time it takes to jog your way to the same fight. The point is though, the option's there for the player, so that in their own discretion, they may choose to engage combat quickly, or slowly. Whichever is most comfortable with them. I've bested other players by deliberately not sprinting into a fight, and I've done the same by sprinting into one, because it's very much dependent on the situation.

Also, I accept you have to use clamber to get the Power Weapon on Truth, however, cheeky counter argument, you actually don't. You can always stick it. ;)

(I know, it's a joke.)

As for the comment about me being in favour of Lore but not knowing Spartan's top speed, I actually was aware of this. I've come across several discussions arguing who's faster between Kelly and Chief, but I was speaking about the game itself in regards to the Spartan's speed.
If the player could run as fast as they are said to be able to in the books, you'd find yourself overshooting everything, falling off ledges, not being able to aim while moving and overall, the experience would not be fun. If Spartans could run at 65 KPH for a few seconds and then tear their tendons, resulting in a crippled limp for the rest of the game, it wouldn't be fun, would it?

I see your points, but I still stand by my point that lore is important as long as it doesn't interfere with fun.
JackLively wrote:
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
JackLively wrote:
AXELNZ wrote:
Your right, in that case my spartan should be able to tale off his helmet to or climb on walls, or peak, or combine thrusters to have insta lill punch, or be able to have their knife out permanently for insta kills, or wall run, why can't I wall run, i saw Buck do it in campaign? See my point, the lore shouldn't dictate the gameplay because it's realistic. By having advanced mobility you are limiting the naps the devs can make, instead of designing the maps around the stuff on the map you are designing them around the players ability to fly, leading to a point where all maps have the same play style leading to you hating all the maps or loving them. And don't get me started on what this mobility has done to every ground vehicle ever.
I get your points but I don't necessarily agree with them. You mentioned about Spartans being unable to sprint and shoot at the same time. If they could, it would be inaccurate, but also would lead to a lot of frustrations among the community. Therefore, in that situation, lore gets in the way of fun, as I said.

Your point about the sprinting and stopping vs running into combat; I'm not sure I follow. Yes, there is a momentary delay between exiting sprint and being able to fire your gun, but the time it takes to do so will not be longer than the time it takes to jog your way to the same fight. The point is though, the option's there for the player, so that in their own discretion, they may choose to engage combat quickly, or slowly. Whichever is most comfortable with them. I've bested other players by deliberately not sprinting into a fight, and I've done the same by sprinting into one, because it's very much dependent on the situation.

Also, I accept you have to use clamber to get the Power Weapon on Truth, however, cheeky counter argument, you actually don't. You can always stick it. ;)

(I know, it's a joke.)

As for the comment about me being in favour of Lore but not knowing Spartan's top speed, I actually was aware of this. I've come across several discussions arguing who's faster between Kelly and Chief, but I was speaking about the game itself in regards to the Spartan's speed.
If the player could run as fast as they are said to be able to in the books, you'd find yourself overshooting everything, falling off ledges, not being able to aim while moving and overall, the experience would not be fun. If Spartans could run at 65 KPH for a few seconds and then tear their tendons, resulting in a crippled limp for the rest of the game, it wouldn't be fun, would it?

I see your points, but I still stand by my point that lore is important as long as it doesn't interfere with fun.
But to many people including myself,it has interfered with how fun the game cold be
The only thing that can save Halo is making Halo unique again. The past two titles have copied the industry and left a gaping hole where Halo used to be.
Spoiler:
Show
Halo's 'edge' was its uniqueness and its tendency to make casual social gameplay the first priority. Have a healthy casual scene, competition will follow.
Spoiler:
Show
The terminology for the hole Halo left behind is an "arena shooter" and they tend to have the following attributes:
Spoiler:
Show
But back onto the OP's comments about "theme"
Spoiler:
Show
So long story short, there are many things that Halo has slowly gotten wrong. Most of them fall under three categories:
1: excessive focus on intense competitive play, thinking that a casual scene will follow. That's the reverse of how it works.
2: the de-socialization of lobbies, ranks, and player unlocks. Nothing matters. Emblems are lame and nobody knows it's yours or where it came from anyway. Nobody has anything worthwhile to grind for.
3: the campaign has moved away from isolation, vastness, and the exclusivity of being a spartan, and much more: being the best spartan
Gubzs wrote:
The only thing that can save Halo is making Halo unique again. The past two titles have copied the industry and left a gaping hole where Halo used to be.
Spoiler:
Show
Halo's 'edge' was its uniqueness and its tendency to make casual social gameplay the first priority. Have a healthy casual scene, competition will follow.
Spoiler:
Show
The terminology for the hole Halo left behind is an "arena shooter" and they tend to have the following attributes:
Spoiler:
Show
But back onto the OP's comments about "theme"
Spoiler:
Show
So long story short, there are many things that Halo has slowly gotten wrong. Most of them fall under three categories:1: excessive focus on intense competitive play, thinking that a casual scene will follow. That's the reverse of how it works.
2: the de-socialization of lobbies, ranks, and player unlocks. Nothing matters. Emblems are lame and nobody knows it's yours or where it came from anyway. Nobody has anything worthwhile to grind for.
3: the campaign has moved away from isolation, vastness, and the exclusivity of being a spartan, and much more: being the best spartan
While I agree that there isn't a game like Halo CE on the market right now, I can't see how Halo 4 throws away the feeling of isolation, nor how they made Chief weak. If anything Halo 4 conveys a feeling very similar to CE. Also I don't think Halo is a full arena shooter, but more of a hybrid.