Poll: Halo 4 poll
- Thread starter DesignatedSniper
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I really enjoyed the first one and being a weird person I desided to leave out the 2nd and the 3rd, guess I didn't want them to change a game that I actually enjoyed alot!
Perhaps if they give all the Halo fans a rest from the game and let it slip to the back of they're minds and then in a couple of years mention a 4th one... That might work out very well for them.
Perhaps if they give all the Halo fans a rest from the game and let it slip to the back of they're minds and then in a couple of years mention a 4th one... That might work out very well for them.
True enough, but the opinion of connoisseurs in any artistic medium often tends to foreshadow the sentiments of the public at large. IMO, Bungie actually got a free ride because critics refused to pull the plug on the Halo phenomena, but that'll change soon enough - especially if the franchise gets another cookie-cutter sequel.
Im a big Halo fan ( and believe it or not Im not a screaming 9 year old) and I think that Bungie should start a new game because I do hate to see good franchises sell out. bungie has a lot of talent that they could use with different types of games.
I think they did say that halo 3 reckon would be their last Halo project but Microsoft owns the wright to the franchise so you know that their going to milk the utters off it
I think they did say that halo 3 reckon would be their last Halo project but Microsoft owns the wright to the franchise so you know that their going to milk the utters off it
Didn't say it was good. But even so there's no denying it's popular. By definition, the only reason cash cows are as such is because people buy them.axia777 said:
I'd prefer them to scrap Halo and do something else, even if it's just a faster paced FPS like Unreal Tournament 3 (Halo has a tendency to be a bit slow for me), but I'd put my money on them keeping Halo going.
I voted don't care, but I don't see why so many people give a definite no in response to the possibility of a Halo 4. What if they made it really, really, really good? You would deny a game just because of its series' past? I don't want to see another no-skill-involved full-of-6 year olds Halo 3, but I would like to see another Halo game. Hopefully a more tactical hardcore one that explores the Halo universe more, like the books.
Like that'll ever happen.
Like that'll ever happen.
I only played 1 and cos i never got a 360 (too much of an mgs fan myself) but i always thought that halo 2 was a massive letdown from Halo CE. Im told that halo 3 was an even bigger downturn from people i know whove played it; its only redeeming feature is the multi player.
they could have ended th story with CE imo; that would have saved the mass over hype that halo 3 was
they could have ended th story with CE imo; that would have saved the mass over hype that halo 3 was
Halo... Halo... Let's all admit it, Halo was ok... It was not brilliant as a series (Halo 1 was brilliant but only until the 2nd made us hate it) , it was not awful. Halo gave FPS a nice new breeze, it didn't invent anything, but it was nice. The two sequels was godawful and mediocre respectively, but the story was ok and the multiplayer didn't change much.
Let's stop trying to hate Halo to death. It is here to stay.
Let's stop trying to hate Halo to death. It is here to stay.
Unless there is some huge innovation in gameplay and storytelling (and they think of a more deep and emotional storyline), than NO!!! Also, why do people keep saying Halo 3 is a bigger letdown than Halo 2? Halo 3's campaign is average in the innovation factor, and can range from decent to mind-less BLOW UP everything in the fun factor. While Halo 2's campaign is shit more ways than one.
It won't happen because the books were such unmistakeable dross that they just make me want to throw up. Fall of Reach was crippled because the author decided there had to be multiple action sequences in the book, even when Master Chief is a ten year old. I don't care about a bunch of pre-teens smacking around elite commando troops. It just brings back sickening memories of all the 'family movies' where you end up feeling sorry for the 'bad guys' because they're getting smacked around by retarded children hyped up on fairy sticks. That and the fact that the actual battle of Reach is a tiny section at the back of the book after a bunch of irrelevant stuff happend makes me want to forget this as fast as possible.ElephantGuts said:
Then there's The Flood, which I have bought but have barely started because at least half the book is just the exact details of the first game listed in the most unimaginative way possible. I'd swear the author was just playing through the game and making notes, up to and including the number of enemies killed and the number of bullets he fired, occasionally adding bits like "Master Chief smiled inside his helmet", because we all know how great a writing technique that is.
And Contact Harvest, of which the first half of the book seems to be dedicated to explaining what the different acronyms mean. However, it is still relatively good, mainly because they got a different author to do a decent job.
But I've saved the worst till last. First Strike. I wanted to know how the Master Chief escaped the ruins of the Halo. I really did. But afterwards I just wanted to reject the reality out of sheer disbelief. What's up with this book? It seems like they can't go five minutes without a fast paced action sequence going past, which always has some unorthodox but hugely effective solution. There's a whole sub-plot about a crystal, which pretty much serves as nothing but an excuse for the author to write in whatever he feels like. It sounds like it came out of the mid of a seven year old.
In short, whether they go into the details of the Halo universe or not, you will end up denying what has happend in the books. What was going through the guys head when he decided to bring back several surviving Spartans that were still around at the end of First Strike? Why are none of the events mentioned in Halo 2? Are they, as Sergeant Johnson says, classified? Is that because they don't want anyone to know just how stupid the war is and that they might as well not bother because Cortana and the Chief will "have a plan"?
You're much better off reading the Mass Effect books. Certainly, the second one is quality.
I certainly won't argue that The Flood wasn't a horrible book, because it was. I'm surprised to find that a lot of people I've spoken to didn't like the other Halo books either, which makes me hesitant to defend them, but I will because I do think they were great books. I don't see how having action in them is a valid critisism, hell at one point you say there's too much action in the books, then you complained that the actual battle for Reach was just a tiny bit at the back of the book. The Fall of Reach, First Strike, and Ghosts of Onyx gave a lot of very interesting background into humanity's plight, the Covenant, and the Forerunners. And Contact Harvest did the same with the background to how the entire conflict began. Sure they weren't perfect, but I don't see how people couldn't like them.Geo Da Sponge said:
And I did read the first Mass Effect book, haven't gotten a chance to read the second one, but I plan to along with the Gears of War book.
meh, i'd rather read more of the books because they've taken the game as far as they could have. and they don't focus too hard on John-117, which is a good break.
On topic: I think there should be more Halo games, so long as you don't have a spartan or an elite as the main character. So long as they honestly try to mix it up a bit, it's cool with me.
Actually, I quite enjoyed some moments of the books for one reason: Private Jenkins. You can actually record his career from his recruitment on Harvest to being on the orbital station in Fall of Reach to becoming infected on Halo, at which point there is actually some more stuff behind that. I did like Contact Harvest overall, it's just First Strike that made me lose my faith in the series.
Sorry for the previous wall of text, but here comes another. Allow me to validate my opinion. My problem with the battle for Reach being so small is that the book is named after it, yet it gets squeezed to the back because of several pointless battles earlier on. Therefore, I felt that there was too much inappropiate action that seemed forced in. That's why I enjoyed the Mass Effect book (damn, I can't remember it's name); it kept the violence and action appropriate. It didn't just go in all guns blazing from the begining like Fall of Reach, so it made you look forward to when it did. In the same way that action movies that become recognised as good movies are the ones that make the combat properly paced throughout the film.ElephantGuts said:
Actually, I quite enjoyed some moments of the books for one reason: Private Jenkins. You can actually record his career from his recruitment on Harvest to being on the orbital station in Fall of Reach to becoming infected on Halo, at which point there is actually some more stuff behind that. I did like Contact Harvest overall, it's just First Strike that made me lose my faith in the series.