I like Master Chief, but I like Master Chief AND CORTANA more. They're buddies. That's what makes the series so good. Cortana being crazy insane AI thing is... a reality of the fiction, but not something I want to play. It'd be like Lethal Weapon 5 where Murtaugh has to take down Riggs.
Getting upset and calling someone names because they express surprise at your statement seems way worse than just saying a common phrase like "what the fuck."
If we as fans have to give developers this many chances at an established franchise than I don't see the point anymore.
The original trilogy has been there to research and be utilized. But no, they had to try to make their own mark and change an iconic series for reasons unknown besides potential pressure from publishers and business leaders out of touch with creative arts.
Halo 4 wasn't received well, but it was widely received (purchased) because it was the new Halo. MCC wasn't received well for obvious reasons, but widely received (purchased) because it's the Halo we loved. Halo 5 was hyped through marketing, lies, deceiving interviews, and PR schlock.
How can we as fans and consumers be more disappointed and unwilling to trust and listen to anything they have to say?
We have been duped too many times and it's abundantly clear that the consumers understand Halo more than 343.
My opinion is worthless because I'm genuinely surprised at your beliefs?
Because it's one of the worst campaigns I've ever seen in a shooter, in terms of everything from tuning to enemy design (none of the new enemies were good or fun to fight!) to narrative to pacing in the narrative, to encounters to just... basic level design? It's one of those games I've been planning to write about forever, but I just got done writing about Mad Max and now I gotta write about a couple other games, so it's gonna be a while before I get to it.
Okay, you might have some deep hate for Halo 4's campaign, but that is definitely not a common opinion. General conscious for Halo 4 is quite positive. It's definitely not crazy for someone to think it's a great campaign. Heck, I consider it the best campaign in the whole series, with Halo 3 coming in at a close second.
Well, I barely knew anything about Halo's lore at all, and I still thought the story in 4 was fine. First game to actually make me legitimately care about the lore and story of the Halo universe.
I don't know, the negative reactions to Halo 4 puzzle me a lot.
If I were 343i I would work on feedback based on the overall message. Creative fields are difficult enough without a million people telling you what to do. Even if you gave everyone what they want it would be an abomination or a case of I wanted it, but now I realise it isn't what I really wanted. Only thing to shut everyone up is to just make an amazing game (easier said than done). But that is why you are the game developers and are paid to do it. Forum goers aren't game developers, they come home think about it for a second and type it out. It's your goal to take that stuff and reinterpret it, they want Chief well Osiris is boring. If Halo fans decided anything we would be playing Halo 3 forever.
Make a great game and no-one will complain regardless of changes. For me I never cared for Halo's story, but the campaign gameplay does not excite me enough to keep me distracted from it anymore. I can't say what the fix is, but there is an issue there, it's not bad (no hyperbole sorry), but it's not amazing like it used to be, maybe that was due to the newness of Halo at the time, but what made Halo great for me was taking part in large battles and large set pieces without being forced to do so.
The multiplayer is still exciting, for me anyway. Few issues there, but I don't mind seeing where they can take it anyway.
i actually really liked halo 5 design-wise certainly compared to 4 but the story was total incoherent bobbins. it didn't suck because of the lack of focus on a boring space marine, it sucked because it sucked.
I like Master Chief, but I like Master Chief AND CORTANA more. They're buddies. That's what makes the series so good. Cortana being crazy insane AI thing is... a reality of the fiction, but not something I want to play. It'd be like Lethal Weapon 5 where Murtaugh has to take down Riggs.
Getting upset and calling someone names because they express surprise at your statement seems way worse than just saying a common phrase like "what the fuck."
Not to be rude (sincerely), but the hate for 4 (and 5 for that matter) is completely understandable from a perspective of original Halo fans. You saying Halo 4 is what made you care about Halo reveals you never personally "understood" or loved the series like so many others. Again, I assure you I'm not being mean spirited. It's not uncommon to hear negative reactions from previous Halo junkies. It's common to hear positive views from different audiences.
When you take an established series with a distinct tone, art style, sound design, story narrative, and gameplay design and arbitrarily change it--why wouldn't the swathes of passionate fans be upset?
Almost everyone that I have come across that either preferred Reach's gameplay or preferred Halo 4's story has all admitted to some capacity that they weren't a big fan of the original trilogy that made Halo what it is. There are always exceptions
ex: HaloGaf's friendly user "Jem"
, but this has proven to be the case many times over. Heck, even close friends that played the original trilogy say what you are saying, but they clearly express that they weren't super invested in it like many fans were, but still derived enjoyment from it (co-op, gameplay, and user friendly matchmaking with good variety).
It's become clear that 343's Halo has simply leveraged the name and loyal community to make a game that appeals to a different audience.
We feel dragged into it and we continue to clamor for "real" Halo. It's absolutely not an elitist nostalgia driven knee jerk pessimism. It's an audience looking back at what they got and feeling bewildered at what they have now.
The problem for me was not playing as Locke. For me, it was chasing Blue Team after the game showed you why Blue Team went "rogue". You saw that Blue Team has a reason as Chief had a vision of Cortana.
The marketing for the game and Hunt the Truth painted Chief as a villain. I would not mind playing as Locke chasing a Chief that is portrayed as a villain and the player is given reason to believe he's a villain. However in Halo 5, you're chasing an innocent man and that sucks.
This interview to me proves again.. And it hurts since I'm a big fan, that they don't get it.
A mainline Halo game not focused on Master Chief could work and is for me something that the series should do going forward.
Halo 5 story could've worked if only 3431 delivered the promise of old spartan vs new spartan action. I want a Halo level where i'm Locke and i have to fight Chief as the stage boss and vice-versa on the next level. Who wants to fight the Warden Eternal for the nth time?!
Also, Blue Team and Team Osiris especially Locke needs some characterization. Don't expect your audience to consume expanded universe media just to empathize and identify with them. Put those characterization in the game itself.
I think they can design a good campaign (4 is good, 5 is great) but character and narrative seem to be beyond them
They overestimate how much of the extended universe the average Halo player has read and seen and delivers their story in the most convoluted way possible
The original trilogy and ODST and Reach weren't groundbreaking examples of video game story telling, but they were effective because they were so simple
I think 343i could make a truly amazing Halo campaign, but I don't think they can do that by following the current narrative path they're on
Not to be rude (sincerely), but the hate for 4 is completely understandable from a perspective of original Halo fans. You saying Halo 4 is what made you care about Halo reveals you never personally "understood" or loved the series like so many others. Again, I assure you I'm not being mean spirited.
When you take an established series with a distinct tone, art style, sound design, story narrative, and gameplay design and arbitrarily change it--why wouldn't the swathes of passionate fans be upset?
Almost everyone that I have come across that either preferred Reach's gameplay or preferred Halo 4's story has all admitted to some capacity that they weren't a big fan of the original trilogy that made Halo what it is. There are always exceptions
ex: HaloGaf's friendly user "Jem"
, but this has proven to be the case many times over.
It's become clear that 343's Halo has simply leveraged the name and loyal community to make a game that appeals to a different audience.
We feel dragged into it and we continue to clamor for "real" Halo.
I feel like you're overreacting significantly and living in your own bubble.
You're trying to make it sound like the 343 Halos are a massive betrayal on the level of the Star Wars prequels, but that is just completely false. Halo 4 and 5 were received quite well from fans old and new. There were missteps of course (Halo 4's multiplayer and Halo 5's co-op campaign.) The new games may not reach the greatness of the Bungie titles for many old fans, but they are definitely not a complete 180 like you're making them seem.
This is not a Resident Evil conundrum. The 343 Halo games still look, sound, and play like Halo.
I do not envy 343's creative. So many different criticisms. It's like a battlefield with arrows slinging in all directions. There are few definitive issues. The noise continues to increase. I don't care to parse itas I said, I don't envy them.
I don't hate all they've done (I even like some of it), but a lot of it needs to burn for this show to work. Get new talent, identify who fucked this up, get the fuck rid of them, then let that new talent marinate, and let them some free reign.
Yup, the takeaway shouldn't be so much that people want more Master Chief, it's that they want interesting characters with some semblance of character development behind them. I mean the Superintendent was more interesting than anyone on Team Osiris.
Not to be rude (sincerely), but the hate for 4 (and 5 for that matter) is completely understandable from a perspective of original Halo fans. You saying Halo 4 is what made you care about Halo reveals you never personally "understood" or loved the series like so many others. Again, I assure you I'm not being mean spirited. It's not uncommon to hear negative reactions from previous Halo junkies. It's common to hear positive views from different audiences.
When you take an established series with a distinct tone, art style, sound design, story narrative, and gameplay design and arbitrarily change it--why wouldn't the swathes of passionate fans be upset?
Almost everyone that I have come across that either preferred Reach's gameplay or preferred Halo 4's story has all admitted to some capacity that they weren't a big fan of the original trilogy that made Halo what it is. There are always exceptions
ex: HaloGaf's friendly user "Jem"
, but this has proven to be the case many times over. Heck, even close friends that played the original trilogy say what you are saying, but they clearly express that they weren't super invested in it like many fans were, but still derived enjoyment from it (co-op, gameplay, and user friendly matchmaking with good variety).
It's become clear that 343's Halo has simply leveraged the name and loyal community to make a game that appeals to a different audience.
We feel dragged into it and we continue to clamor for "real" Halo. It's absolutely not an elitist nostalgia driven knee jerk pessimism. It's an audience looking back at what they got and feeling bewildered at what they have now.
If you think Halo 4 is even remotely comparable to something like Darkest of Days it's because of a bias that you're bringing to it, not because of the quality of the game. Going to such hyperbolic extremes is unecessary when your point could easily be distilled to "I didn't like it"
WELL I THINK Master Chief are a nice guy and Spartan Locke are a dumb name and I don't care about ANY team (except the ODST team, if they count), Osiris, Blue, Noble (Noble specifically, what a bunch of shitlords. Non-characters and Ls x6) and campaigns and multiplayers are things so is Forge Forge is cool except John Forge that's also a stupid-ass name
I feel like you're overreacting significantly and living in your own bubble.
You're trying to make it sound like the 343 Halos are a massive betrayal on the level of the Star Wars prequels, but that is just completely false. Halo 4 and 5 were received quite well from fans old and new. There were missteps of course (Halo 4's multiplayer and Halo 5's co-op campaign.) The new games may not reach the greatness of the Bungie titles for many old fans, but they are definitely not a complete 180 like you're making them seem.
This is not a Resident Evil conundrum. The 343 Halo games still look, sound, and play like Halo.
Nope. In the eyes of many many fans you are simply "incorrect."
People who don't understand the impact of all the changes made don't understand how Halo worked in the first place. That might sound elitist or close-minded, but it's a strong opinion that has been argued to death and still argued to this day... Since Reach.
Even in HaloGaf we have passionate Halo 4 and 5 fans that defend it, but understand the constant push back and counter arguments.
Again, 343's Halo is not appealing to the same audience and perspectives.
Again, I want to emphasize I'm not trying to attack you, but this is coming from a passionate Halo nerd that has been part of a massive community of like-minded individuals for over a decade.
That's fine to love 343's Halo, but there are tons of well documented videos, blogs, articles, and discussions on the Internet breaking all of this down.
Many have already given up on the franchise, but a lot of us cling to hope because no other games even come close to the style and execution of the original trilogy. Say what you will, but this isn't emotional hyperbole. It's nerdy fan convictions lol
can halo 5's colossal narrative fuck up be fixed with a sequel? i aint so sure, boys
halo 4 at least had pathos and committed to its chief/cortana relationship, and to a nice conclusion that worked well, i thought. sure, the exposition dump that was the librarian's speech mightve been handled better, but what can you do?
The hysterical vitriol fans leveled at 343 after Halo 5, despite that game solving almost all of Halo 4's stupid balance and design issues, and offering the best competitive gameplay and base mechanics in the series' history, was unbelievable. It gives me little hope that 343 could ever win back the people who have decided to run with the absurd "343 ruined Halo!" narrative.
Did those chuckleheads play Reach and experience the brilliance of aim bloom, wildly imbalanced armor abilities, and loadouts? Bungie didn't exactly quit when they were ahead.
How many times did you play it? Have you tried a bunch of different approaches to the giant hangar room in the second mission? Did you make use of the huge variety of branching paths, multitiered areas, and hidden weapon caches? Have you tried loading up your team with heavy weapons, or telling them to snipe, or to cover you with turrets or vehicles? I wonder how much you really explored the options the campaign offered you.
The issue isn't the lack of Chief persé, although not playing as the Chief certainly didn't help, it's more that when a 30 second commercial has a better story than your entire several hour game you've messed up.
There was no mystery in H5.
Fighting the same boss over and over again wasn't fun.
Right of the bat the throws the built-up from the previous game in the garbage bin (doing nothing with the janus key, killing Jul U'mdama in a cutscene, etc).
Cortana felt more like a lover than a friend/buddy/partner (please stop this fanfiction).
Why should we care about Osiris?
Huge focus on 4 player co-op. Why does this need to be included in the story? H3 method worked perfectly fine with the other players becoming the Arbiter or other unamed Elites. The solo campaign was degraded by this heavy focus on 4 player gameplay imo.
Not to be rude (sincerely), but the hate for 4 (and 5 for that matter) is completely understandable from a perspective of original Halo fans. You saying Halo 4 is what made you care about Halo reveals you never personally "understood" or loved the series like so many others. Again, I assure you I'm not being mean spirited. It's not uncommon to hear negative reactions from previous Halo junkies. It's common to hear positive views from different audiences.
When you take an established series with a distinct tone, art style, sound design, story narrative, and gameplay design and arbitrarily change it--why wouldn't the swathes of passionate fans be upset?
Almost everyone that I have come across that either preferred Reach's gameplay or preferred Halo 4's story has all admitted to some capacity that they weren't a big fan of the original trilogy that made Halo what it is. There are always exceptions
ex: HaloGaf's friendly user "Jem"
, but this has proven to be the case many times over. Heck, even close friends that played the original trilogy say what you are saying, but they clearly express that they weren't super invested in it like many fans were, but still derived enjoyment from it (co-op, gameplay, and user friendly matchmaking with good variety).
It's become clear that 343's Halo has simply leveraged the name and loyal community to make a game that appeals to a different audience.
We feel dragged into it and we continue to clamor for "real" Halo. It's absolutely not an elitist nostalgia driven knee jerk pessimism. It's an audience looking back at what they got and feeling bewildered at what they have now.
The hysterical vitriol fans leveled at 343 after Halo 5, despite that game solving almost all of Halo 4's stupid balance and design issues, and offering the best competitive gameplay and base mechanics in the series' history, was unbelievable. It gives me little hope that 343 could ever win back the people who have decided to run with the absurd "343 ruined Halo!" narrative.
Did those chuckleheads play Reach and experience the brilliance of aim bloom, wildly imbalanced armor abilities, and loadouts? Bungie didn't exactly quit when they were ahead.
Bringing up Reach solves nothing. Of course us "chuckleheads" remember it. We loathed the arbitrary changes back then. This isn't merely a 343 vs Bungie issue. It's just easier to say "343's Halo" because they brought the core Halo identity even further away and drastically than Reach did. Reach was clearly a spin off (similarly to ODST) that playfully experimented on Halo's core. It wasn't a continuation of the main series.
No one bats an eye that other franchises that have fans that stand by tried and true designs and demand for faithful continuity.
Halo 5 didn't so much as solve existing issues, but made those issues less troublesome. Many of the issues still exist, but nuanced differently.
I guess I and others are "chuckle heads" for having an analytical eye and informed opinions on game design and understanding how arbitrary changes effect the core identity of the series.
Btw, I saw ur edit and I agree that Halo 5 had some pretty kickass level design greatly enjoyed some of that aspect!
To me the issue isn't that people literally can't handle new charracters, it's that there was NO good reason we couldn't just play the entire game as Chief. all of the interesting plot points of Halo 5 revolved around Chief and Cortana, as usual, and Osiris added very little to that. The characters were fine, but when their story is just Chief's story through someone's eyes that is barely there for any of the good parts, it's a little pointless feeling.
And anyone hating on Halo 4's story...screw that, Halo 4 had a great story and great characters, the problem was that if you haven't paid close attention and/or read any extended fiction (or at least wiki'd shit) you could get lost, that's a huge fucking flaw. But the story itself was interesting and I LOVED Chief/Cortana's relationship in 4. I do think that her reappearing as the bad guy in 5 undermined that a bit, however. A game where you play as Chief losing it because he lost his best and only real connection would've been far more impactful, instead that happens while we're largely not seeing him (because we're Locke and co) and then is resolved immediately because he gets the transmission from Cortana.
The hysterical vitriol fans leveled at 343 after Halo 5, despite that game solving almost all of Halo 4's stupid balance and design issues, and offering the best competitive gameplay and base mechanics in the series' history, was unbelievable. It gives me little hope that 343 could ever win back the people who have decided to run with the absurd "343 ruined Halo!" narrative.
Did those chuckleheads play Reach and experience the brilliance of aim bloom, wildly imbalanced armor abilities, and loadouts? Bungie didn't exactly quit when they were ahead.
People can criticise the Halo 5 campaign while acknowledging that the multiplayer was great. You're sounding pretty hysterical yourself here...
Halo 5 multi isn't perfect btw. Their server selection is absolutely horrible and most matches have people teleporting around and eating shots. Any other game I play online works fine. You could have the best game in the world but if the connections are bad it ruins everything.
I don't think they want to create their own game and IP because they're a studio literally created to make Halo games. You don't apply for a job that exists solely to make Halo games and go "I don't want to make Halo games."
I think they want to put their mark on the series, to prove they're just as good as Bungie, rather than make their own IP.
The problem is that their mark has yet to give us a good game.
I don't think they want to create their own game and IP because they're a studio literally created to make Halo games. You don't apply for a job that exists solely to make Halo games and go "I don't want to make Halo games."
I think they want to put their mark on the series, to prove they're just as good as Bungie, rather than make their own IP.
The problem is that their mark has yet to give us a good game.
343 actually couldn't tell interviewees that the studio was specifically working on Halo 4, just that the studio was working on something involving Halo.
"We had people who we hired who hated Halo because of 'X,'" says O'Connor. "But what that really meant was, 'I feel like this game could be awesome because of 'Y input' that I'm going to bring into it. I want to prove it, and I'm passionate about proving it.' So we ended up with a bunch of people who were genuinely passionate about the product. That is a huge advantage, and that helped in hiring and forming our team."
I don't believe them. They were aware of the emotional attachment towards the chief, but still took a risk in replacing him. Had fans, including myself not voiced their opinion, the Chief would probably die in the next game.
Start telling a good story in the game. The characters aren't the problem.
If I was writing Halo 6, I would find a way to kill Luke Cage and Palmer. They are both failed experiments.
The response seems somewhat veiled as in ''we understand that people wanted more Chief and he's the gateway to the Halo universe for the players. But but but.. in creating more characters etc. around him, we actually sort of fulfilled that demand.''
In other words, we did nothing wrong. But I might be reading into that too deeply.
Regardless, Halo 5's story did not captivate me in any way. Although of course, that feeling is enhanced because of the non-memorable encounters and level design. I still vividly remember levels and occurrences from any other Halo, yet can't for Halo 5.
The hysterical vitriol fans leveled at 343 after Halo 5, despite that game solving almost all of Halo 4's stupid balance and design issues, and offering the best competitive gameplay and base mechanics in the series' history, was unbelievable. It gives me little hope that 343 could ever win back the people who have decided to run with the absurd "343 ruined Halo!" narrative.
Lol how could they not see that happening? Removing the focus on Master Chief at this point in time is like focus on another character in Metroid or Tomb Raider or Zelda or Uncharted. Just don't.
You can do a ton of other stuff to mix things up and make a game more interesting than shifting the focus away from the main character everybody know and love.
Has there ever been a successful character swap in a long going AAA serie?
Honestly 4 and 5 are natural evolutions to what bungie started with reach, which was a far worse multiplayer game than either of the 343 games. Reach had the far superior campaign however (and firefight) to bolster its content.
Lol how could they not see that happening? Removing the focus on Master Chief at this point in time is like focus on another character in Metroid or Tomb Raider or Zelda or Uncharted. Just don't.
You can do a ton of other stuff to mix things up and make a game more interesting than shifting the focus away from the main character everybody know and love.
Has there ever been a successful character swap in a long going AAA serie?
Thing is, you can play as Locke as still have the game focus on Master Chief. Nobody complained about the Lock v. Chief perspective of the pre launch marketing. The game failed in that respect.
Honestly 4 and 5 are natural evolutions to what bungie started with reach, which was a far worse multiplayer game than either of the 343 games. Reach had the far superior campaign however (and firefight) to bolster its content.
I don't mind not-focusing on Chief. I felt his story was done. People ultimately expected Guardians to focus on Chief because you had already built that expectation by bringing him back in Halo 4. Had it been "Team Osiris" front and centre from the start, then you'd have been more convincing that Halo didn't need Chief as the central playable character. We had already had two games without him.
There should have been no surprise about folks wanting him in 5 with the way H4 went. The time to pull a bait & switch surprise was with 4, but that didn't happen that way.
-----
Maybe Chief could have died in stasis and you'd have part of the game listening to creepy, cryptic clues left behind by Cortana and slowly realizing how delusional and in denial she was over time, leading the audience on that he's still to be found and safe, and how maddening it was as she recollected her experiences of the trilogy* trying to find meaning in John's anti-climactic death in the ass-end of space and her own existential crisis.
---
Continuity-wise, sure, H4 might have ended up being The Search for 117 with Christopher Lloyd as the bad guy and a legendary ending with Chief's cryo-tube full of Lekgolo, but at least there wouldn't be the expectation of playing as 117. Then in Halo 5, you could have the Voyage Home with whales threatening the galaxy while you were out and about looking for Chief. And then in 6 you deal with assassination plots & insurgents. ¯\_(ツ_/¯
ahem. Bed time.
*Might have been fun to tie in Cortana's rose-tinted, glorified, and potentially inconsistent recollections with the Anniversary remasters, if you think about it.
This response feels like the WB "We are going to make DC Movies less serious going forward" response to BvS. Completely missing what was actually wrong with the previous product and backing away from anything that would make it stand out. Doubling down on Master Chief is a stupid idea because we already have plenty of games about him and his entire presence in the story hasn't been remotely interesting after 3. They should have left him dead.
Okay, you might have some deep hate for Halo 4's campaign, but that is definitely not a common opinion. General conscious for Halo 4 is quite positive. It's definitely not crazy for someone to think it's a great campaign. Heck, I consider it the best campaign in the whole series, with Halo 3 coming in at a close second.
Your reaction feels unjustified.
Well, I barely knew anything about Halo's lore at all, and I still thought the story in 4 was fine. First game to actually make me legitimately care about the lore and story of the Halo universe.
I don't know, the negative reactions to Halo 4 puzzle me a lot.
Really? The game that ended with a QTE was given a positive reception from fans? Cause I was a huge fan and Halo 4 fucking stunk. It was complete trash. Everything about it was wrong. 343 can double down on MC all they want, they still have no idea how to make a good Halo game
I long for a timeline when the MCC released working properly to give us legitimate player populations. I'd likely still be playing if the game worked and had the players to.support it.
Based on the ending of 4 , the prerelease halo 5 material (Poncho Chief alone in the desert confronting machines) and all the hype of ex Metroid Prime devs coming onboard i was really hoping we were going to see a modern day Metroid Prime.
Would have been amazing playing as chief exploring derelict planets / archives trying to "find" cortana or some other threat, turning your back on the UNSC and going solo.
Turns out none of that meant anything and we got an entirely different direction which was dissapointing.
Anyone else thing a Modern Day Halo done in a metroid prime style (scanning / exploration) would be amazing ?
I still loved Halo 5, warts and all. Great campaign effort. That said, I'm glad they're learning some lessons. How stuff like the Warden Eternal ever made it past QA is just baffling: someone's bad idea making it too far.
That said, I wouldn't be oppossed to 343 finding a way to wrap up the current story/universe. It's rapidly approaching the point of critical mass, as it is. They can let it rest for five or six years while they get cracking on a new IP for their corporate overlords, then come back and do a (soft)-reboot of Halo.
From a marketing point the MC is really perfect since he is in a suit all the time and everybody (male) can think themself into him (till face reveal).
Halo games a pretty entertaining scifi shoot bang and the mp was always really good.
I felt like a bigger problem was how Blue Team was suddenly part of the story with no explanation whatsofuckingever! And they never got any screentime!
"Oh yeah, here's some awesome characters from the books. They've got an interesting relationship with MC, but let's just use them as a generic squad."
_/¯ 