Fresh out Halo 4 trailer from Bungie!

Halo is so washed up. Halo reach gameplay is out of date.

Bungie is not making it?? How is it going to compare?? Probly wont be as good...

Bungie is not making it?? How is it going to compare?? Probly wont be as good...

InjuredStraw

Bungie is not making it?? How is it going to compare?? Probly wont be as good...

InjuredStraw

A couple of bungie developers went to 363, 323, 636 or whatever the hell the name of that company is.

But still, the game will most likely suck..

I loved halo, but the whole halo thing got old.

[QUOTE="InjuredStraw"]

Bungie is not making it?? How is it going to compare?? Probly wont be as good...

JoeJoeLaker

A couple of bungie developers went to 363, 323, 636 or whatever the hell the name of that company is.

But still, the game will most likely suck..

I loved halo, but the whole halo thing got old.

Halo's gameplay is out of date.

JoeJoeLaker

[QUOTE="JoeJoeLaker"][QUOTE="InjuredStraw"]

Bungie is not making it?? How is it going to compare?? Probly wont be as good...

vashkey

A couple of bungie developers went to 363, 323, 636 or whatever the hell the name of that company is.

But still, the game will most likely suck..

I loved halo, but the whole halo thing got old.

He's trolling because he doesn't think it will be good :lol: ? Get over it. He has just as much of a right to be pessimistic about agame as you have to be optimistic about it.

I think Halo is extremely boring now. Reach's campaign was good gameplay wise, but that story was garbage imo. The multiplayer was fun for a few weeks, but got old very, very quick. Halo 3 bored me even quicker. Halo 2 was/is probably my second favorite game ever, just in terms of multiplayer, though.

[QUOTE="JoeJoeLaker"]

Halo's gameplay is out of date.

YoungSinatra25

Quoted for truth. I want to see SOMETHING new from them in terms of gameplay mechanics, controls, etc... They need to take some risks. I was happy when I saw Reach's trailers and what not because I thought the gameplay was going to change significantly. All they did was add 4 abilities...? Lame. They might as well pump out rehashes every year like Activision if they aren't going to give their experience some new flair.

Halo gameplay isn't out of date. At all. Kudos to Bungie for not jumping in with now generic shooters like CoD and BF.Ki-ool

Go play Halo:CE and then Reach. They feel the same, they play the same, you're doing the same things. I wouldn't say it's out of date, but it's getting there.

[QUOTE="Ki-ool"]Halo gameplay isn't out of date. At all. Kudos to Bungie for not jumping in with now generic shooters like CoD and BF.elpooz

Go play Halo:CE and then Reach. They feel the same, they play the same, you're doing the same things. I wouldn't say it's out of date, but it's getting there.

[QUOTE="elpooz"]

[QUOTE="Ki-ool"]Halo gameplay isn't out of date. At all. Kudos to Bungie for not jumping in with now generic shooters like CoD and BF.John_Read

Go play Halo:CE and then Reach. They feel the same, they play the same, you're doing the same things. I wouldn't say it's out of date, but it's getting there.

Name another series where the first installment feels strikingly similar to the fifthinstallment, besides CoD. Halo:CE came out on the original Xbox, as a LAUNCH title, Reach came out 5 years into the 360's lifecycle. They should feel different :|.

It's ridiculous to call BF generic, and praise Halo as if it isn't. Why? Because it has aliens and spaceships? Go play BF1942 then Bad Company 2 lol... Different in numerous, numerous ways. Halo: CE to Halo 2 was the most progressive this series has ever taken, and that really isn't saying much at all...

Halo: Reach felt like ODST/3, just like ODST felt like 3, just like 3 felt like 2 with better graphics/technicals, just like 2 felt like CE with duel weilding...

Halo, just like CoD, needs to do something different and new with its gameplay.

[QUOTE="John_Read"][QUOTE="elpooz"]

Go play Halo:CE and then Reach. They feel the same, they play the same, you're doing the same things. I wouldn't say it's out of date, but it's getting there.

elpooz

Name another series where the first installment feels strikingly similar to the fifthinstallment, besides CoD. Halo:CE came out on the original Xbox, as a LAUNCH title, Reach came out 5 years into the 360's lifecycle. They should feel different :|.

It's ridiculous to call BF generic, and praise Halo as if it isn't. Why? Because it has aliens and spaceships? Go play BF1942 then Bad Company 2 lol... Different in numerous, numerous ways. Halo: CE to Halo 2 was the most progressive this series has ever taken, and that really isn't saying much at all...

Halo: Reach felt like ODST/3, just like ODST felt like 3, just like 3 felt like 2 with better graphics/technicals, just like 2 felt like CE with duel weilding...

Halo, just like CoD, needs to do something different and new with its gameplay.

[QUOTE="elpooz"]

[QUOTE="John_Read"] that can be said to almost any gameJohn_Read

Name another series where the first installment feels strikingly similar to the fifthinstallment, besides CoD. Halo:CE came out on the original Xbox, as a LAUNCH title, Reach came out 5 years into the 360's lifecycle. They should feel different :|.

It's ridiculous to call BF generic, and praise Halo as if it isn't. Why? Because it has aliens and spaceships? Go play BF1942 then Bad Company 2 lol... Different in numerous, numerous ways. Halo: CE to Halo 2 was the most progressive this series has ever taken, and that really isn't saying much at all...

Halo: Reach felt like ODST/3, just like ODST felt like 3, just like 3 felt like 2 with better graphics/technicals, just like 2 felt like CE with duel weilding...

Halo, just like CoD, needs to do something different and new with its gameplay.

None of those games have 5 installments lol :?... or even 4... And Gears/Portal/LBP only have two each lol.

[QUOTE="YoungSinatra25"]

[QUOTE="JoeJoeLaker"]

Halo's gameplay is out of date.

elpooz

Quoted for truth. I want to see SOMETHING new from them in terms of gameplay mechanics, controls, etc... They need to take some risks. I was happy when I saw Reach's trailers and what not because I thought the gameplay was going to change significantly. All they did was add 4 abilities...? Lame. They might as well pump out rehashes every year like Activision if they aren't going to give their experience some new flair.

See this is what I don't understand. What do you guys expect them to do? They can't completely revamp Halo's gameplay, then it wouldn't be Halo. Halo has changed way more from the first one than any other FPS franchise.

To the dude with the Battlefield icon. What has changed with Battlefield? Not much. Same thing with COD. Halo added dual-wielding, then let you play as an elite and then added armor abilities. Those are pretty significant changes. Why change gameplay that has worked so well...

Bungie is not making it?? How is it going to compare?? Probly wont be as good...

InjuredStraw

I still think Halo Reach is pretty awesome. I like playing with friends and strangers alike on XBOX live.

I'm always looking for games and new friends. Gualoh is my SN.

[QUOTE="Ki-ool"]Halo gameplay isn't out of date. At all. Kudos to Bungie for not jumping in with now generic shooters like CoD and BF.elpooz

Go play Halo:CE and then Reach. They feel the same, they play the same, you're doing the same things. I wouldn't say it's out of date, but it's getting there.

[QUOTE="Ki-ool"]Halo gameplay isn't out of date. At all. Kudos to Bungie for not jumping in with now generic shooters like CoD and BF.elpooz

Go play Halo:CE and then Reach. They feel the same, they play the same, you're doing the same things. I wouldn't say it's out of date, but it's getting there.

Good troll there.

I can't stand CE. The level design is soooooo repetitive and boring the only way I made through the game was playing co-op with my brother after he had already beaten it on Legendary. Halo 2 was a little better but I only got on the whole Halo thing around 3. Besides, have you played ODST? Yeah, just like CE. Oh, you mean shooting things in a first-person view is what you do over and over again? In that case, Halo = Wolfstein 3D. Right on the money, sir.

See this is what I don't understand. What do you guys expect them to do? They can't completely revamp Halo's gameplay, then it wouldn't be Halo. Halo has changed way more from the first one than any other FPS franchise.

To the dude with the Battlefield icon. What has changed with Battlefield? Not much. Same thing with COD. Halo added dual-wielding, then let you play as an elite and then added armor abilities. Those are pretty significant changes. Why change gameplay that has worked so well...

firefox59

Name another series where the first installment feels strikingly similar to the fifthinstallment, besides CoD. Halo:CE came out on the original Xbox, as a LAUNCH title, Reach came out 5 years into the 360's lifecycle. They should feel different :|.

It's ridiculous to call BF generic, and praise Halo as if it isn't. Why? Because it has aliens and spaceships? Go play BF1942 then Bad Company 2 lol... Different in numerous, numerous ways. Halo: CE to Halo 2 was the most progressive this series has ever taken, and that really isn't saying much at all...

Halo: Reach felt like ODST/3, just like ODST felt like 3, just like 3 felt like 2 with better graphics/technicals, just like 2 felt like CE with duel weilding...

Halo, just like CoD, needs to do something different and new with its gameplay.

elpooz

Flip the question around and name another series where subsequent games in the series don't feel strikingly similar to the first. There really aren't any. Why make drastic changes to an extremely successful series?

[QUOTE="JoeJoeLaker"][QUOTE="InjuredStraw"]

Bungie is not making it?? How is it going to compare?? Probly wont be as good...

vashkey

A couple of bungie developers went to 363, 323, 636 or whatever the hell the name of that company is.

But still, the game will most likely suck..

I loved halo, but the whole halo thing got old.

Haaaa, Your funny.. Butt hurt fanboy.

Learn what a troll is.

[QUOTE="firefox59"]

See this is what I don't understand. What do you guys expect them to do? They can't completely revamp Halo's gameplay, then it wouldn't be Halo. Halo has changed way more from the first one than any other FPS franchise.

To the dude with the Battlefield icon. What has changed with Battlefield? Not much. Same thing with COD. Halo added dual-wielding, then let you play as an elite and then added armor abilities. Those are pretty significant changes. Why change gameplay that has worked so well...

YoungSinatra25

C'mon man. Every new FPS game has a new campaign. Halo has Co-op. Battlefield has always had destructible environments, that's their claim. Halo Reach had a beta so they wouldn't have to balance weapons post release. Halo is based on much more advanced tech so bullet characteristics is irrelevant.

Ok, dual-wielding was an advancement from the first to the second game. You're acting like every sequel has to contain what the previous ones did. Just cause you "hate" Elites means that everyone does and its a useless addition? Lol ok then. And as for that last comment. Masterchief has single-handedly taken out thousands and thousands of advanced alien creatures without dying. What more do you want? You're not superman, your a soldier in a suit. You're also not an indestructable mech.

So many angered fanboys here :lol:. Get over your beloved game, it's not that good :|. And I'm a troll? Right. Because I don't agree with you/think what you think? That term is used so inappropriately on GS.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" doesn't apply to video games. This is a progressive industry and always has been. Cool, the Halo formula works, but that doens't mean they can't do something new with it to make it feel more fresh. They CAN revamp the gameplay mechanics and still have it be Halo. This is a NEW trilogy, wtf would I play it if it's simply the OLD trilogy with better technicals and a different plotline :|? Lame.

:lol:

Oh goodness... someone asked how BF has made changes and then says Halo's addition of armor abilities and duel-weilding were signifcant changes :lol: and that Halo has changed the more since CE than other FPS franchises have. Do you play video games? Better question: do you play anything besides Halo? That post had TOO much fail for me to process in my mind... I had to reread it like 4 times to make SURE that I understood what was happening...

Go play BF1942, BF: Vietnam, BF2, BF2142, BF:BC, BF:BC2 and try to tell me that Halo has made more changes or that BF hasn't :|.

Ill-informed people are ill-informed.

[QUOTE="John_Read"][QUOTE="elpooz"]

Name another series where the first installment feels strikingly similar to the fifthinstallment, besides CoD. Halo:CE came out on the original Xbox, as a LAUNCH title, Reach came out 5 years into the 360's lifecycle. They should feel different :|.

It's ridiculous to call BF generic, and praise Halo as if it isn't. Why? Because it has aliens and spaceships? Go play BF1942 then Bad Company 2 lol... Different in numerous, numerous ways. Halo: CE to Halo 2 was the most progressive this series has ever taken, and that really isn't saying much at all...

Halo: Reach felt like ODST/3, just like ODST felt like 3, just like 3 felt like 2 with better graphics/technicals, just like 2 felt like CE with duel weilding...

Halo, just like CoD, needs to do something different and new with its gameplay.

elpooz

None of those games have 5 installments lol :?... or even 4... And Gears/Portal/LBP only have two each lol.

:lol:

Oh goodness... someone asked how BF has made changes and then says Halo's addition of armor abilities and duel-weilding were signifcant changes :lol: and that Halo has changed the more since CE than other FPS franchises have. Do you play video games? Better question: do you play anything besides Halo? That post had TOO much fail for me to process in my mind... I had to reread it like 4 times to make SURE that I understood what was happening...

Go play BF1942, BF: Vietnam, BF2, BF2142, BF:BC, BF:BC2 and try to tell me that Halo has made more changes or that BF hasn't :|.

Ill-informed people are ill-informed.

elpooz

[QUOTE="elpooz"]

:lol:

Oh goodness... someone asked how BF has made changes and then says Halo's addition of armor abilities and duel-weilding were signifcant changes :lol: and that Halo has changed the more since CE than other FPS franchises have. Do you play video games? Better question: do you play anything besides Halo? That post had TOO much fail for me to process in my mind... I had to reread it like 4 times to make SURE that I understood what was happening...

Go play BF1942, BF: Vietnam, BF2, BF2142, BF:BC, BF:BC2 and try to tell me that Halo has made more changes or that BF hasn't :|.

Ill-informed people are ill-informed.

firefox59

Lol... umadbro? Insulting someone's intelligence online is a fail. Take a breather... go outside, fan yourself off, then reenter the message board please.

How can you even offeran informed opinion when you haven't even owned the other 4 Halo games :|? Having "played them with friends" really doesn't say much nor do I think that gives you the experience to accurately talk about the franchise and its changes lol. No one misunderstands anything. This franchise has made minor changes, and I'm tired of the same game. I want something new, and I'm sure tons of other people feel the same way.

And when you say BF has not changed much from game to game, then comment on Halo making significant changes from entry to entry, you ARE implying that Halo has changed more than other franchises, especially when you include CoD in your post. I did no forcing of my "assumptions" into your opinion ( :lol: ). Still waiting for you to tell me how Halo has made more changes than BF... :|

[QUOTE="elpooz"]

[QUOTE="John_Read"] gears,HL2 and episodes,Portal,LBP,...........:PJohn_Read

None of those games have 5 installments lol :?... or even 4... And Gears/Portal/LBP only have two each lol.

Didn't know you could see the future and know for a fact that Portal will have 5 entries (highly unlikely), Gears will have 5 entries (somewhat unlikely), LBP will have 5 entries (highly unlikely), Dead Space will have 5 entries (again, highly unlikely), and that L4D will have 5 entries (againx2, highly unlikely) and that ALL of those games, if they were to get up to 5 installments, would have a 5th that felt and played like the 1st. You should really invest in some stocks... you'd make a killing with that ability :o

[QUOTE="YoungSinatra25"]

[QUOTE="firefox59"]

See this is what I don't understand. What do you guys expect them to do? They can't completely revamp Halo's gameplay, then it wouldn't be Halo. Halo has changed way more from the first one than any other FPS franchise.

To the dude with the Battlefield icon. What has changed with Battlefield? Not much. Same thing with COD. Halo added dual-wielding, then let you play as an elite and then added armor abilities. Those are pretty significant changes. Why change gameplay that has worked so well...

firefox59

C'mon man. Every new FPS game has a new campaign. Halo has Co-op. Battlefield has always had destructible environments, that's their claim. Halo Reach had a beta so they wouldn't have to balance weapons post release. Halo is based on much more advanced tech so bullet characteristics is irrelevant.

Ok, dual-wielding was an advancement from the first to the second game. You're acting like every sequel has to contain what the previous ones did. Just cause you "hate" Elites means that everyone does and its a useless addition? Lol ok then. And as for that last comment. Masterchief has single-handedly taken out thousands and thousands of advanced alien creatures without dying. What more do you want? You're not superman, your a soldier in a suit. You're also not an indestructable mech.

Wow, the ignorance. First of all, campaigns in a Battlefield game are a big deal because the first several instalments were multiplayer only. This was a big change. Second of all, Battlefield has ALWAYS had destructible environments? Hm, that's interesting. Perhaps you could hop on 1942, BF2, or BF2142 with me and show me how you can destroy buildings in those games? There have been more games in this series without destructible environments than with them. If you haven't played the games, please don't comment on them or pretend like you know what you're talking about.

As for playing as Elites... how is this any different than playing as a Spartan? You have just as much health, all that changes are the lame tacked-on 'armour abilities.' Not a change.

Halo is incredibly dated, I don't see how anyone could believe otherwise. The series has changed very little since its inception. Hell, Call of Duty has changed more over time than Halo has (perks, kill streak rewards, customizableloadouts and weapons). Halo needs to change big time, which is why I'm hoping 343 Industries will be bolder than Bungie and actually do something with the awesome sci-fi universe that is Halo.

You guys have got to be kidding me. You're all saying the same things. Games with real people like COD and Battlefield have room to change over time periods with different tech and throughout multiple eras. Halo was a trilogy taking place over a relatively short period of time. If you drastically changed the gameplay it just wouldn't make since. Your saying Battlefield games that take place over a 60 year period have changed, well duh. Your arguments don't make any sense. In terms of the game world, technology takes time to develop. I'm sure the new Halo series will have a bunch of new stuff.

@All, lets go back to the H4 talk instead of flaming one another. We've madeour points and really taking this into a systems war type of discussion.

Anyone else actually wishing they didn't bring the Chief back? (*raises hand*) Love the Chief and all, it's just I kinda like having my own personal Spartan. Character customization will return in the MP but I personally like having my own Spartan in cut scenes and what have you. It feels more personal. Wish Halo4 was a progression of the Spartan Project rather then a progression of the Chief's story. Technically it still could be depending on how they approach the story. (differentperspectives/timeline) But since technically Halo turns into Marathon I'm not sure where the stories going.

You guys have got to be kidding me. You're all saying the same things. Games with real people like COD and Battlefield have room to change over time periods with different tech and throughout multiple eras. Halo was a trilogy taking place over a relatively short period of time. If you drastically changed the gameplay it just wouldn't make since. Your saying Battlefield games that take place over a 60 year period have changed, well duh. Your arguments don't make any sense. In terms of the game world, technology takes time to develop. I'm sure the new Halo series will have a bunch of new stuff.

firefox59

BF has changed/added core gameplay mechanics as well as smaller gameplay mechanics and systems. Changing the tech/weapons/vehicles in a game isn't the only way to make changes :|.. that's actually the smallest, most insignificant way you could alter a game, in comparison to adding/dropping/revamping gameplay mechanics, changing the art design, etc... . Stop making excuses for the Halo franchise :lol:... they are afraid to take risks and lose their following, so they keep everything at the core of the game EXACTLY the same. And now it's getting boring. E3 this year was FULL of developers taking progressive steps with their games. The new Tomb Raider looks drastically different from the series we know, NG 3 looks very little like 1 and 2, Bioshock Infinite has added a fully-fleshed out population, faction mechanics and much more to their game to clearly separateit from Bioshock 1 and 2, Skyrim looks like it will be Oblivion on crack, the Ghost Recon series has gone through a huge overhaul, Far Cry 3 shows changes thematically and has added new mechanics (and that's from the TINY bit they've showed off...), Battlefield 3 has done a whole plethora of things that will differentiate it from any BF before it in a major way, and Halo 4... well that's most likely gonna be like any other Halo :|. The campaigns always follow the same course more or less, with the same exact gameplay, and the multiplayer hasn't been fresh since Halo 2. If they want my $60, they need to take some risks and bring something fresh to the table with this game. There is so much progression and innovation going on in the industry right now, and too many promising titles coming out, for me to choose to buy a game that will be giving me the same experience I've gotten with every previous installment in its series...

[QUOTE="firefox59"]

[QUOTE="YoungSinatra25"]Well start with what they added this gen. A campaign, co-op,"destructible environments". (game changer right there) Sound design with overall fidelity boarding on audiophile quality. Dice supported BC2 with free maps, they balanced their weapons after release due to community feedback. (NO ONE DOES THAT) Realistic bullet characteristics which have bullet travel and bullet drop.
They improved upon every aspect of their game with each new release. Come on, obviously you didn't play the games.
Other then features which Halo is king of, their delivering more in the gameplay department then any other franchise. I can do what I do in every other game in Bf but their things in Bf I can do that you can't do in other games... Period. And Bf3 looksto havemore progression of the already solid gameplay.
I'm not trying to sell you on the game but seeing as how your asking me what they've delivered or improved upon over the years, there we go.(theres more but it's turning into a rant)
Obviously you don't know.


Halo has always had invisibility and overshield, theirs your Armor abilities. They removed dual-wielding so I'm not sure why you mentioned it. And no one wants to be the monsters. I kill Elites, I hate Elites. So no, those aren't significant changes or improvements compared to what Dice has done with BF. This wasn't even a debate...

As for what they can do to improve the game. You play as a ****ing supersoldier in advanced body armor. What can't they do? Halo doesn't make you feel like a supersoldier, make me feel like that supersolder damn it...

creeping-deth87

C'mon man. Every new FPS game has a new campaign. Halo has Co-op. Battlefield has always had destructible environments, that's their claim. Halo Reach had a beta so they wouldn't have to balance weapons post release. Halo is based on much more advanced tech so bullet characteristics is irrelevant.

Ok, dual-wielding was an advancement from the first to the second game. You're acting like every sequel has to contain what the previous ones did. Just cause you "hate" Elites means that everyone does and its a useless addition? Lol ok then. And as for that last comment. Masterchief has single-handedly taken out thousands and thousands of advanced alien creatures without dying. What more do you want? You're not superman, your a soldier in a suit. You're also not an indestructable mech.

Wow, the ignorance. First of all, campaigns in a Battlefield game are a big deal because the first several instalments were multiplayer only. This was a big change. Second of all, Battlefield has ALWAYS had destructible environments? Hm, that's interesting. Perhaps you could hop on 1942, BF2, or BF2142 with me and show me how you can destroy buildings in those games? There have been more games in this series without destructible environments than with them. If you haven't played the games, please don't comment on them or pretend like you know what you're talking about.

As for playing as Elites... how is this any different than playing as a Spartan? You have just as much health, all that changes are the lame tacked-on 'armour abilities.' Not a change.

Halo is incredibly dated, I don't see how anyone could believe otherwise. The series has changed very little since its inception. Hell, Call of Duty has changed more over time than Halo has (perks, kill streak rewards, customizableloadouts and weapons). Halo needs to change big time, which is why I'm hoping 343 Industries will be bolder than Bungie and actually do something with the awesome sci-fi universe that is Halo.

This man speaks the truth in so many ways...

This thread is full of ill-informed people/people with inadequate experience with what they are talking about. Saying BF hasn't made changes is just ridiculous... not even justifiable in the slightest. And then to top that off by saying adding duel-weilding is a significant change? Or that adding 4 armor abilities is? Try harder...