Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

[xboxdigger 94]

I would pull up the Josh Holme's post directly refuting this bullshit but Im on mobile. They hired people who didn't like Halo for specific reason, people who wanted to make Halo what they thought was better. Maybe they didn't like two hit melees, maybe they didn't like it's relatively slow pace, or maybe they just hated bloom.

 

The original quite never stated what people actually didn't like, nor how they influenced the design of 343's halo. As far as we know, the whole 343 team could be CE fanboys that hated everything after it, but got forced to copy from CoD because of management/publishers, as unlikely as that sounds.

 

I'm not saying 343 don't have a horrible track record with most aspects of the franchise, but twisting words around to suite your one-dimensional agenda gets really bloody tedious.

I remember how it went..

 

343: We hired people who hated Halo.

 

Community: WHAT!?!?!?!?!?!? sadfoijsdfiuoafhsouhsdfj

 

343: Just to clarify, we hired people that dislike certain features from Halo. 

 

You are right.. I don't hate COD. I just dislike aim down sights, sprint, the quick kill times, the loadouts, the things you call in whatever they are called, grabbing onto ledges, and some other features as well. 

[xSociety]

Imagine what Gears 4 would look like if Coalition hired people who hated the roadie run or didn't like the cover based system. It would look like a bastardized version of it's predecessors, which is what we got with Halo 5. 

[Toa Axis]

Imagine what Gears 4 would look like if Coalition hired people who hated the roadie run or didn't like the cover based system. It would look like a bastardized version of it's predecessors, which is what we got with Halo 5. 

Man, I'm so jealous of Gears fans. They were in the same situation as us, with the series they like being in the hands of a fresh developer. But unlike 343, The Coalition released a solid, faithful game right from the start, and with much better eSports/league support than NuHalo.

 

I recall an interview from them in which they said that they'd rather play it safe and make sure they can get the core of Gears' gameplay down before they start changing things up too much. That's a much better mindset to have than changing everything to make it "their" Gears. 

 

It just shows that these kinds of things can be done well, which is a shame to think about when you look at what we got :/

[EagleBurn]

I would pull up the Josh Holme's post directly refuting this bullshit but Im on mobile. They hired people who didn't like Halo for specific reason, people who wanted to make Halo what they thought was better. Maybe they didn't like two hit melees, maybe they didn't like it's relatively slow pace, or maybe they just hated bloom.

 

The original quite never stated what people actually didn't like, nor how they influenced the design of 343's halo. As far as we know, the whole 343 team could be CE fanboys that hated everything after it, but got forced to copy from CoD because of management/publishers, as unlikely as that sounds.

 

I'm not saying 343 don't have a horrible track record with most aspects of the franchise, but twisting words around to suite your one-dimensional agenda gets really bloody tedious.

 

Implying that it's more of Microsoft is giving 343 a 'get out of jail' card.

 

Look at Ubisoft and their games. In terms of gameplay, they have an extrmeme amount of simlaries with Watch Dogs, Far Cry, and Assassin's Creed. They're all open-world with towers that unlock different areas. They all function the same because Ubisoft obviously forces design decisions on these developers.

 

Now let's look at Microsoft. Gears of War, Halo, and Forza all their top three published titles. All of which couldn't be any more different. Besides pricing and DLC, there is little to no evidence that MIcrosoft forces design decisions on developers. It's just a thing people say. There is more evidence of them having the "give them money and let them work" method than anything.

 

Also, just look at The Coalition if you want more evidence. They were in the exact same situation as 343 and they stuck to the core of the series more than GoW3 and arguably GoW 2 did...on their first attempt. 343 has no excuses.

[Lukes]

Here's the "we hired people who hated Halo" article if anyone wants to see the full quote from Frankie.

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/191234/making_halo_4_a_story_about_.php?page=3

[ABearInTheWoods]

Here's the "we hired people who hated Halo" article if anyone wants to see the full quote from Frankie.

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/191234/making_halo_4_a_story_about_.php?page=3

 

And the sad part?  The people who used to love Halo and be a part of this community just disappear.  

 

What explanation is there for @@Bravo not visiting these forums for over a year?

[TeeJaY]

I remember there being an article where 343 pitched Halo 4 to Microsoft and they said it felt "too Halo" and not modern enough, so 343 went a new direction. Too lazy to find it. Doesn't excuse their mistakes but it was an interesting read.

[arglactable]

Judgement was the Reach of GoW and the follow-up from a new studio is the most intentionally "Gears of War" game since the first one. Gameplay is faithful, art style is faithful, sound design is faithful (and actually good). It's unmistakably a Gears title.  Apparently, 343's idea of going back to the series' roots is calling the H5 Magnum a "true utility weapon" with a straight face.

[calberto]

if only the gears community could understand how luckey they are...they get so whiny about their micro transactions (which is a sad joke considering how those work..) and some people actually don't like their "stay true to your identity"-approach.

..

"[...]
And let's not forget how this game simply has not grown whatsoever. Same old gameplay. NOTHING innovative, or creative, or interesting. I'm done fooling myself into thinking this is all great, just because I'm a long time Gears player and fan. 
[...]
I just feel like the people who develop this game do not create with the consumer in mind. If these guys wanted to create a gears game, they would create with the mindset of a consumer.. and maybe create some truly innovative ideas. Because mostly this game is cut and paste with a few shoddy systems put into place. I can't believe I'm saying this, but I think I'm done with this franchise. It's all smoke and mirrors. Rod worries more about the creativity of his martini pics on twitter!"

[Lukes]

The new Gears game did make me envious of their development team. Now, we can only imagine what that would be like if Halo went the same route.

 

I also watched that Driftor review of the new Cod game and it was giving me flashbacks to Halo 4. I don't follow their scene, but I feel sorry for them if that's what they have to play.

[MattFeast117]

Judgement was the Reach of GoW and the follow-up from a new studio is the most intentionally "Gears of War" game since the first one. Gameplay is faithful, art style is faithful, sound design is faithful (and actually good). It's unmistakably a Gears title.  Apparently, 343's idea of going back to the series' roots is calling the H5 Magnum a "true utility weapon" with a straight face.

 

Quinn's idea of E-Sports lmao

 

[Moa]

Quinn's idea of E-Sports lmao

 

Man, I forgot that Quinn was the reason people disliked GoW: Judgement MP.

 

Why did we give him a free pass back in 2013?

[Nades]

The new Gears game did make me envious of their development team. Now, we can only imagine what that would be like if Halo went the same route.

 

I also watched that Driftor review of the new Cod game and it was giving me flashbacks to Halo 4. I don't follow their scene, but I feel sorry for them if that's what they have to play.

Difference is that the CoD community jumped onto the bandwagon of complaining about getting "the same game every year". They changed the game, now are pissed off at the developers for changing the game.

 

Now CoD is going to be in the same situation Halo is in, theres going to be people wanting both 'versions' of CoD, its now gonna have an identity crisis and the community will become split and toxic just like our community.

[Given To Fly]

Here's the "we hired people who hated Halo" article if anyone wants to see the full quote from Frankie.

 

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/191234/making_halo_4_a_story_about_.php?page=3

 

lmao I've never seen this before. This doesn't even make sense on paper.

[Bassman]

Man, I'm so jealous of Gears fans. They were in the same situation as us, with the series they like being in the hands of a fresh developer. But unlike 343, The Coalition released a solid, faithful game right from the start, and with much better eSports/league support than NuHalo.

 

I recall an interview from them in which they said that they'd rather play it safe and make sure they can get the core of Gears' gameplay down before they start changing things up too much. That's a much better mindset to have than changing everything to make it "their" Gears. 

 

It just shows that these kinds of things can be done well, which is a shame to think about when you look at what we got :/

For what it's worth, I'm already hearing multiple game journalists call for The Coalition to make big innovations in GoW5. They say that they like the familiarity and "back to basics" approach of 4, but they hope that 5 is something "fresh". There's so much pressure on devs to try "new and fresh", and to a certain extent, they have to bow down to critics (as bullshit as it is).

[Edain]

Man, I forgot that Quinn was the reason people disliked GoW: Judgement MP.

 

Why did we give him a free pass back in 2013?

H4 Turbo

[arglactable]

Quinn's idea of E-Sports lmao

 

 

I think my brain is actually leaking out of my ear after watching that. Good lord.

[wow]

If you have a solid and flexible core game, for me 'fresh' should mean new features, new story, new environment, an extended/tweaked sandbox (think grenades, vehicles, equipment, map traversal), new customisation, new characters, new Xbox live interaction, new music, etc.

 

Not changing the core gameplay, which is what made the game great in the first place. Well, you can change it, but only the aspects that were overwhelmingly poorly received (eg h2 SMG starts or CE's delayed jumping).

 

Don't fix what's not broken.

[Bassman]

If you have a solid and flexible core game, for me 'fresh' should mean new features, new story, new environment, an extended/tweaked sandbox (think grenades, vehicles, equipment, map traversal), new customisation, new characters, new Xbox live interaction, new music, etc.

 

Not changing the core gameplay, which is what made the game great in the first place. Well, you can change it, but only the aspects that were overwhelmingly poorly received (eg h2 SMG starts or CE's delayed jumping).

 

Don't fix what's not broken.

I definitely agree that this is how it SHOULD be, but I honestly can't think of too many franchises (that I've played) that have managed to maintain their roots throughout. And not only that, but it's a SELLING point when a franchise returns to its roots. Can't tell you how many times I've seen Nintendo talk about "returning to their roots" with Mario or Zelda. I mean, look at Super Mario 64. When people talk about games that completely changed their perception of video games, SM64 is WAY up there, but nonetheless, the very next outing was a DRASTIC change. Then obviously we see what's happened with CoD which arguably didn't need any changes at all, but nevertheless kept getting revised and revised until it's pretty unrecognizable from CoD4. I absolutely agree that sequels should just be improvements on what made the original great, but it just never seems to work that way for one reason or another. 

[Hard Way]

I definitely agree that this is how it SHOULD be, but I honestly can't think of too many franchises (that I've played) that have managed to maintain their roots throughout. And not only that, but it's a SELLING point when a franchise returns to its roots. Can't tell you how many times I've seen Nintendo talk about "returning to their roots" with Mario or Zelda. I mean, look at Super Mario 64. When people talk about games that completely changed their perception of video games, SM64 is WAY up there, but nonetheless, the very next outing was a DRASTIC change. Then obviously we see what's happened with CoD which arguably didn't need any changes at all, but nevertheless kept getting revised and revised until it's pretty unrecognizable from CoD4. I absolutely agree that sequels should just be improvements on what made the original great, but it just never seems to work that way for one reason or another. 

 

CoD should be commended for changing as little as it did over the years. It was a very gradual change all the way up until Advanced Warfare and Black Ops 3.  That's when the extra mobility stuff came in and completely changed the gameplay. For many years they kept the core the same and just worked on fleshing out their features like customization, theatre, bot matches, league play, zombies, and their excellent progression system.  Its just a shame the gameplay was so garbage because everything else was pretty great.

 

That said, it was sad to see the killstreaks get so out of hand so quickly. I remember HATING airstrikes and especially the chopper in CoD4, so imagine how much I hated all the bullshit they added in MW2 (it still might be my most hated game ever). I mean you could literally win an objective game by camping. How fucking stupid. Ugh, it makes me mad just thinking about it.

[Meek Meek Meek]

Glad to know that 343 is putting in so much effort into fixing glitches that have been present for months.

 

/s

 

https://clips.twitch.tv/vetoeds/ModernPartridgePogChamp

[Bassman]

CoD should be commended for changing as little as it did over the years. It was a very gradual change all the way up until Advanced Warfare and Black Ops 3. That's when the extra mobility stuff came in and completely changed the gameplay. For many years they kept the core the same and just worked on fleshing out their features like customization, theatre, bot matches, league play, zombies, and their excellent progression system. Its just a shame the gameplay was so garbage because everything else was pretty great.

 

That said, it was sad to see the killstreaks get so out of hand so quickly. I remember HATING airstrikes and especially the chopper in CoD4, so imagine how much I hated all the bullshit they added in MW2 (it still might be my most hated game ever). I mean you could literally win an objective game by camping. How fucking stupid. Ugh, it makes me mad just thinking about it.

That's fair. But I think they kind of submitted to critics that said they released the same game year after year, and they started to make changes that might pull fans from other franchises. but in doing so, they alienated the people that genuinely enjoyed CoD as is. Just my opinion. But I'm right with you on the kill streaks. Snowbally doesn't even begin to describe them.

[The Tyco]

Kinda want get some food for thought going.

 

What if we revamped Halo's scoring system (in the context of basic slayer modes) to account for any style points? Actually reward players for the medals they earn, and allow better players to separate themselves from those take the easy way out (Autos, shallow power weapons).

 

This mostly a possible solution to our current weapon balance woes. I would rather have improvements to the sandbox, but this system could help ease the pain. Thoughts?

[GunRanger]

One thing I never hear talked about are the inconsistent recharge times. Same battle same shots but an enemy will have his shit reloaded before I even start to recharge and I don't sprint or thrust

[Turkeyyy Lips]

I remember there being an article where 343 pitched Halo 4 to Microsoft and they said it felt "too Halo" and not modern enough, so 343 went a new direction. Too lazy to find it. Doesn't excuse their mistakes but it was an interesting read.

I remember this also. I believe it was a quote from Josh Holmes.