[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9iQiHNXgMU[/youtube]

From what I've been reading, this will be the first of a trilogy of new Halo games. 343 Industries, which has quite a few ex-Bungie guys, is developing.

What I'm wondering is, besides the story-driven campaign, what else is left that can possibly breath new life into the series?

They need to stop grinding out titles like the next installment of Madden or Guitar Hero and put more thought into them. In short - more exploration, more storytelling through discovery instead of narration - make things new again and stop just putting me inside a suit of power armour and shoving a rifle in my hand because the game case says Halo on it somewhere.

They tried RTS with Halo Wars and even though I'm a fan of the Halo-verse I was pretty lukewarm about it.

For me ODST was the most original of all the titles (not counting Halo Wars) since you don't play as a Spartan. I loved the storytelling in ODST and it shows how much Bungie learned over the years and the tactical style of combat was much better than the typical run & gun in other installments of the fanchise. If it had multiplayer co-op I'd say it was a better game than Reach.

Then there's the one chapter in Reach that every single player I've talked to absolutely loved...piloting the Sabre. It's been a long time since I've played Wing Commander but if Bungie wasn't actively channeling Chris Roberts then they were at least being subliminally influenced by him - the space fighter portion deserves it's own game. If 343 wanted make it it's own sub-franchise that's possible too (and without streching the ip as far as they did in Halo Wars). Run & gun furball battles between fighters in space, close air support for troops while flying a Hornet/Falcon/Vulture, troop insertion with a Pelican (maybe a stealthy spec-ops insertion for added difficulty) and even sections of slow, plodding RTS (or even turn based) maneuvering of capital ships providing fire support & planetary siege/defense.

How about letting me explore more of the Halo-verse as a civilian? Put the fear of the covies back into people by stripping them out of the armour and maybe having them fight off grunts (or the Flood!) with a pistol. If you want to see players cower in fear again...don't make the enemies stronger, make the player weaker. How about fighting off a horde of enemies with no weapon other than a vehicle and a lugwrench.

I'm through doing 343's homework, they want more ideas then they can put me on the payroll.

BusyBadger wrote:For me ODST was the most original of all the titles (not counting Halo Wars) since you don't play as a Spartan. I loved the storytelling in ODST and it shows how much Bungie learned over the years and the tactical style of combat was much better than the typical run & gun in other installments of the fanchise. If it had multiplayer co-op I'd say it was a better game than Reach.

I recall playing both the campaign and firefight on ODST over XBL.

As for Halo 4, hopefully 343 does at least as well as Bungie did. I'm also excited about the Combat Evolved re-release on the 360. Hopefully they add a few neat things to make it a slightly different experience. And more hopefully, I hope they don't put the false ceilings on the levels like they have been since Halo 3.

BusyBadger wrote:They tried RTS with Halo Wars and even though I'm a fan of the Halo-verse I was pretty lukewarm about it.

Funny, coming at it from the opposite direction, I have exactly the opposite feelings on Halo Wars. I'm not a particular fan of the Haloverse (don't dislike it particularly either, though) but I AM a big RTS nerd. Ensemble did some really brilliant things with the RTS formula to make it genuinely WORK on a console with a gamepad. It wasn't just adapted for or forced onto the platform. It worked. There were shortcomings, like all units/unit types sharing a single special attack button--making group micro difficult, but in the end it was something I didn't think would ever happen: an RTS that actually works correctly with a gamepad. But even as a guy raised on C&C, TA, WarII, SC, and Ensemble's own AoE, I still found a lot to like in Halo Wars. It was very trimmed down, but what was there was generally well-realized and, in a rare bit of true inspiration, some of that fat-trimming actually led to (gasp) innovation and GOOD THINGS. I particularly loved the base management system and the strategy that went with it.

As far as Halo as a whole...I've played them all but ODST. The only one that did anything for me was Reach. So if 343 can deliver another Reach, I'll have no complaints. But I don't like CoD, I didn't like Halo 2, and I have no desire to play another "yearly" shooter series.

Haven't played any of the other Halos besides 1,2,3. One was the best by far and 2 and 3 caused me to no longer play the Halo series. However, just like the F&F I will give them a chance.

This is just a re do of the first game correct?

MinisterofDOOM wrote:

BusyBadger wrote:They tried RTS with Halo Wars and even though I'm a fan of the Halo-verse I was pretty lukewarm about it.

Funny, coming at it from the opposite direction, I have exactly the opposite feelings on Halo Wars. I'm not a particular fan of the Haloverse (don't dislike it particularly either, though) but I AM a big RTS nerd. Ensemble did some really brilliant things with the RTS formula to make it genuinely WORK on a console with a gamepad. It wasn't just adapted for or forced onto the platform. It worked. There were shortcomings, like all units/unit types sharing a single special attack button--making group micro difficult, but in the end it was something I didn't think would ever happen: an RTS that actually works correctly with a gamepad. But even as a guy raised on C&C, TA, WarII, SC, and Ensemble's own AoE, I still found a lot to like in Halo Wars. It was very trimmed down, but what was there was generally well-realized and, in a rare bit of true inspiration, some of that fat-trimming actually led to (gasp) innovation and GOOD THINGS. I particularly loved the base management system and the strategy that went with it.

As far as Halo as a whole...I've played them all but ODST. The only one that did anything for me was Reach. So if 343 can deliver another Reach, I'll have no complaints. But I don't like CoD, I didn't like Halo 2, and I have no desire to play another "yearly" shooter series.

I'm not a RTS'er so that's why I probably didn't like Wars. But I am a huge tactical guy, I miss the way Ghost Recon used to be...you know, good - so that's why I liked ODST so much. Liek you, if it's a quality title like ODST or Reach I'll be ok with 343's offering(s) but I sure as hell don't want to see the Halo franchise turn into "another shooter" and travel down the Guitar Hero/Madden/Tiger Woods roiute where it's just the same game every time. If that's teh case just push it out via DLC and save me 40 bucks and waiting in line at GS or ordering from Amazon.

snwbrdr435 wrote:This is just a re do of the first game correct?

Nope. Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary is the original game with updated graphics using the Reach engine that's coming out this fall.

Halo 4 is a new game that's (presumably) the beginning of a new trilogy from 343 Industries. Hopefully there will be some more substance to the gamers, 343 has hired sci-fi writer Greg Bear to pen a new set of novels, so maybe we'll see some of that translate over to some good (ie: less convoluted) storylines for the new trilogy.

Well maybe they will make it not suck? Make an epic campaign. I played the combat evolved campaign more hours then i would like to admit too

ODST would have been my favorite, but there was no versus mode. Campaign was the best though in my own opinion.