between ADS and weapons unlocked in campaign being available as loadouts in multiplayer, i have more faith in halo 5's MP than destiny's. of course this is all open for change as we know next to nothing about destiny pvp and jack shit about halo 5.
Most Halo fans completely disagree with you. I don't think halo 4 deserves hate especially in the campaign but I sure as hell hope the devs focus on other halo games like CE and reach for the campaign and CE,2 and 3 for multiplayer. Halo 4 was not a great start.
I don't think halo is in much competition with destiny as it is with the next COD and BF games. Destiny seems very different than a competitive shooter.
It's not even really popular at the moment. Their GOTY edition didn't even move the needle on the online population, and DLC required lists often have less than 100 people playing.
Then this happened
I believe I read something in another thread about how 'every game does not have to sell millions of copies to be successful'. It talked about companies shoe-horning multiplayer modes, horde mode, etc into their games and changing the formula from the original title into some grotesque mockery of the series' former glory in order to "appeal to a broader audience" and "widen their scope". This is basically double talk for chasing bigger profits rather than making a really great game based on the formula that made a series great, and its disappointing.
I don't think halo is in much competition with destiny as it is with the next COD and BF games. Destiny seems very different than a competitive shooter.
MGS5 is having a big dose of anti-hypeit's the same for a lot of big franchises right now.
Mgs5 hype is nowhere near 4 level's
I couldn't agree more. I won't go into a big long thing either---but what truly let me down the most about 3 is the lack of tension and scale. There is a massive war going on, but they don't make me feel it. The ending of Mass Effect 1 is a great example of how one makes a moment epic in scale and tense as Hell. I truly felt at the end of Mass Effect: "If we lose here, the world is fucked". Halo 3 never gave me that feeling, and it should have.Maybe most Halo fans disagree with me on GAF, but a lot of other Halo players I know that have been playing this thing from the start just like the rest of us, agree that Halo 4 seemingly brought some fresh life to the franchise that seemed like it was on the verge of stagnating. Halo 3 had so many flaws that I really do feel get overlooked simply due to all the incredible and innovative features that Halo 3 introduced at launch for such a highly anticipated shooter. It was a fantastic example of a dev really giving players their full money's worth with the content in the game.
However, I feel the core Halo 3 campaign experience, as much as I enjoyed it at the time, really did suffer in a lot of ways that were improved big time in Reach, and then taken to a whole other level in Halo 4. I just want certain ideas adopted from Halo 3 and placed into the next Halo title, such as the more epic battles the likes of what was seen with those scarabs in Halo 3. That said, I still believe that both Halo Reach and 4 were much better games even without scarab battles. I could really go into a long rant on this, but I don't really want to, as I'm sure I've said most of this on here or other places before. I really do feel Halo 3 is the weakest and most overhyped game in the Halo franchise. I feel in an effort to showcase just how big they could make battles, the rest of the game's design suffered as a result. Not only that, I feel a lot more focus was paid to things that weren't as crucial to the campaign experience. Halo 1, 2, Reach and 4, to me, are on a whole other level from Halo 3 in terms of the campaign experience.
I agree. I think people are tempted to compare them for obvious reasons, but they aren't competing in the same space, I feel. Halo is truly competing against the likes of COD, BF, and possibly Killzone. Oh, and definitely now Titanfall, I feel.
MGS5 is having a big dose of anti-hype
1. David Hayter
2. Ground Zeroes - Phantom Pain mess and confusion
3. A direct sequel to mainly a handheld game(one of my favorites of the series but still an overlooked handheld iteration)
I argue MGS1, 2, 3, and 4 are all you need since 4 concluded the Patriots Story Arc. Anything else dabs before 4 is just highly expensive gear grinding. It would probably help for you to not care if Big Boss' games were only portable.I was watching the 120 hour marathon (some of it) this week and that's where I found that peace walker (portable ops too) is a prequel to ground zero, and not MGS3. After that I found myself much less enthusiastic about ground zero. It will probably be a good idea, but I won't know what the hell is happening with the back story.
Halo without Bungie is like letting someone other than George RR Martin write the next ASoIF book.
...A great thing?Halo without Bungie is like letting someone other than George RR Martin write the next ASoIF book.
Maybe most Halo fans disagree with me on GAF, but a lot of other Halo players I know that have been playing this thing from the start just like the rest of us, agree that Halo 4 seemingly brought some fresh life to the franchise that seemed like it was on the verge of stagnating. Halo 3 had so many flaws that I really do feel get overlooked simply due to all the incredible and innovative features that Halo 3 introduced at launch for such a highly anticipated shooter. It was a fantastic example of a dev really giving players their full money's worth with the content in the game.
However, I feel the core Halo 3 campaign experience, as much as I enjoyed it at the time, really did suffer in a lot of ways that were improved big time in Reach, and then taken to a whole other level in Halo 4. I just want certain ideas adopted from Halo 3 and placed into the next Halo title, such as the more epic battles the likes of what was seen with those scarabs in Halo 3. That said, I still believe that both Halo Reach and 4 were much better games even without scarab battles. I could really go into a long rant on this, but I don't really want to, as I'm sure I've said most of this on here or other places before. I really do feel Halo 3 is the weakest and most overhyped game in the Halo franchise. I feel in an effort to showcase just how big they could make battles, the rest of the game's design suffered as a result. Not only that, I feel a lot more focus was paid to things that weren't as crucial to the campaign experience. Halo 1, 2, Reach and 4, to me, are on a whole other level from Halo 3 in terms of the campaign experience.
I agree. I think people are tempted to compare them for obvious reasons, but they aren't competing in the same space, I feel. Halo is truly competing against the likes of COD, BF, and possibly Killzone. Oh, and definitely now Titanfall, I feel.
Halo without Bungie is like letting someone other than George RR Martin write the next ASoIF book.
Nope, not even close. I thought Halo 4 was the best game in the entire franchise. I only play campaign.
I think it had the best combination of weapons (I've never found myself enjoying a set of weapons more than I did switching between the various arsenal of weapons, along with some of my favorites, the promethean light rifle, scattershot, and the incineration cannon), the most fun overall enemies to fight (The promethean knights with their watchers genuinely bring something new and fresh feeling to halo sandbox combat, and I enjoyed it a lot), the gameplay has never felt better, hit detection is finally where I wanted it to be, the sound design is awesome (armor, weapons have real pop to them), the story and character development I felt was the best I've seen from the series. I feel Halo 4, as far as pacing is concerned, is the best paced Halo campaign of them all. The chief has never looked more badass, but they also managed to dig deeper into his character and what made him human without ruining his character. In that sense it really felt more like the nylund books than any of the other games that came before it. It's also the Halo title that finally delivered on the promise that was made with Cortana's character in the build up to Halo 3. The art was also the best I've personally ever seen from the series, and, most important of all since the game came to the 360, I actually found the environments in Halo 4 a lot more impressively designed and believable, in the sense that it was easy to imagine them serving a real, functional purpose, and not just feeling like a random playtest area.
The production values and presentation were just fantastic. Halo has always been a good franchise. No, a great franchise, but I really did feel even after the much improved Halo Reach, which was quite a step up over Halo 3 I thought in a number of ways, that Halo as a franchise was slowly losing its appeal, and just didn't feel like it was getting enough of blockbuster treatment you would expect of Microsoft's biggest franchise. I think Halo, even while not straying too drastically from the tried and true formula, brought some much needed life back to the franchise, so, really, I've never anticipated any Halo game more than I'm now anticipating the followup to Halo 4, which I hope is as good as Halo 4 was. Everybody is putting out this impression that it's unanimous that 343i somehow screwed up, and I can't really say for the MP since I'm not an MP guy, but they sure as hell delivered one incredible campaign experience. 343i, in my opinion, honestly proved that they have what it takes to handle the Halo franchise with Halo 4.
No more Corrinne and no more Kenneth Scott as art director, however, does have me more than a little bit nervous, but I hope it doesn't impact the game too much. Either way, I couldn't disagree more with the hate on Halo 4. It was a fantastic fucking game.
Halo 4 was the only Halo that ever deleted my campaign save. So yeah it's dead to me.
Halo without Bungie is like letting someone other than George RR Martin write the next ASoIF book.
Please explain.Halo 4 was the most worthless piece of trash I've ever seen. Everything went downhill after 2, although I played the shit out of 3.
Halo 4 was the most worthless piece of trash I've ever seen. Everything went downhill after 2, although I played the shit out of 3.
Halo 4 grossed US$220 million on its launch day and $300 million in its opening week. Yep, dead as a doornail.
For perspective, Halo 3 was $170 million on launch day.
Halo 4 was the most worthless piece of trash I've ever seen. Everything went downhill after 2, although I played the shit out of 3.
What's with the Halo/Destiny comparison? Is it because of Bungie or because of the scifi setting? Because from what I've seen of Destiny, it doesn't seem like the game to scratch my Halo multiplayer itch. I'm not saying I'm not excited for Destiny, but it seems like a completely different multiplayer experience to me. But no, I don't believe Halo is dead. Plus what I've read on here GAF, I'm pretty excited over the direction 343i seems to be taking.
Yes everyone is entitled to their own opinion but sales are sales and all Halo games have done very well.
Halo 3 sold 11.8 Million, Halo Reach sold 9.57, Halo 4 sold 8.97. Halo 4 Had nearly double the install base of 3, actually almost triple
3 was not even a Halo game. Felt like a resistance rip off. Halo 2 was the last great Halo game.
Sales are sales and Halo 4 is the worst selling of the 3 main halo games this gen even though it had a 3 times the install base of 3
Whoa now, no. Halo 3 was wonderful. The first three Halos are all equally amazing in very different ways.
Halo 3 was a cross media hype fest with broken levels.
always thought 2 was the worst (until 4) as far as the single player went.3 was not even a Halo game. Felt like a resistance rip off. Halo 2 was the last great Halo game.
I disagree.