Do you think Halo is still a strong name in gaming?

#31UrgaleetPosted 9/18/2013 7:12:22 PM
Definitely weakened.
---
Get him, girls! Maybe you can get a rise out of this limp wimp.
I AM the Shogun of Harlem!
#32Spectral_CloudPosted 9/18/2013 7:34:14 PM
It is still strong though it really shouldn't be. Halo is riding off of the previous games while quickly becoming worse and worse at each individual game in the series. Halo 4 was simply terrible compared to the previous games though people still see it was gods given game to humanity. It will stay every bit as strong as CoD unfortunately.
---
(V)0-0(V) This is Mudcrab. Copy and paste him into your signature to help him achieve world Domination.
#33iBlackice25Posted 9/18/2013 7:36:57 PM
Weakened, massively.
---
GT: DarknessSniperX
dustloop: Legion13
#34FenixxPosted 9/18/2013 8:05:37 PM
Halo used to be basically a system seller. Now it's more along the lines of you'll buy the game if you happen to have the system. The series has never really changed much and it's slowly killing itself.
---
My Game Collection - http://backloggery.com/VelaruneGaming
#35turtlej-manPosted 9/18/2013 8:06:03 PM
DIVINExFABLE posted...
Prodozul posted...
DIVINExFABLE posted...
Halo 4 was 343's first halo, and I do believe that they are listening to the community and changing the game somewhat accordingly. If the next halo is made like halo 3, with none of that BS armor abilities and whatnot, it will sell like hot cakes. Halo reach and 4 could not sustain a solid amount of players after like 6 months. If I remember correctly, halo 3 still had like 300k+ players 2 years into it being out. THAT is the sort of sustainability it needs to be at.


Halo Reach has more players playing than 4


That doesn't really effect what I said. It still isn't holding up like H3. H3 was the golden age for me lol. The best of days right there.


I would say that the reason Halo 3 lasted so well was due to it being the only major console fps. Call of Duty was just barely taking over with Modern Warfare, and Battlefield 3 was still a long way away. So if you wanted a really good competitive shooter with an active community, your main option was Halo 3.

Halo Reach did terribly due to it's terrible multiplayer maps. Halo 4 is a great game, but I do agree that it went a little too heavy with armor abilities and customizing loadouts. They got rid of map and weapon control... That's a big part of what makes Halo so great.
---
If a Killer Instinct 3 is never made....AT LEAST PUT THE FIRST 2 ON XBLA!!!!!
#36krisalyxPosted 9/18/2013 8:11:54 PM
really? halo? nope it's gears or at least call of duty unless the new game salvages the broken reputation of the last oh 20 broken games
#37RayconPosted 9/18/2013 8:40:57 PM
The_DOAM posted...
People say Halo has gone down hill since Bungie left and you know what I say to those people?

Halo: ODST


If you ask me, even Bungie was losing it's touch with anything after Halo 2.
---
I must have looked a fool playing with a backwards DS, teary eyed solving a Sudoku puzzle -Lordx718
#38georgewduff1Posted 9/18/2013 8:42:58 PM
Halo 4 ....

5,8 million copy sold in North America...8,51 million worldwide....

Halo 3

7,74 million North america...11,8...worldwide...




GT5 on PS3...North america....2,64 million...worldwide....10,54...

Uncharted 3....PS3...North America....2,51 million...worldwide....6,03...

So Halo 4 sold more copy worldwide than GT5 in North america....and all their exclusives...except Uncharted 2 who have reach 3,10 million in North america...

Strong name...you bet...
---
XboxOne and my gaming addiction are perfect match :) GT: george w duff
#39DesperateMonkeyPosted 9/18/2013 8:45:38 PM
I here all this Halo 4 hate but I thought it was the best game in the series... Except for the lack of firefight. I loved firefight and I can't believe they gave us those co-op crap instead.

XB1 however, is a chance to step up their game. The Xbox 360 jumped to HD but it didn't really give much in the room of gameplay improvements. Halo being a online focused game should have some real uses for Cloud, will automatically be better because of dedicated servers and could implement a lot of new features.

I don't think Bungie is very necessary. They were good for creating the series but they aren't needed to continue it.
---
GT: ZiiX360 PSN: BoxFighter85
PC: i7 930@4Ghz | EX58 UD5 | GTX 460 SLI | 8GB DDR3 | 500GB Spinpoint | Vertex 2 180 SSD | Cooler Master HAF X | VG236H
#40Webmaster4531Posted 9/18/2013 10:05:24 PM(edited)
vega2505 posted...
Halo is dead...343 has no idea what they're doing...but just because a franchise is dead doesn't mean it will go away or stop selling tons, like Sonic.


Yeah, I think sonic is a good comparison if you replace completely incompetence with not understanding what made the earlier games good.

I don't think bungie did very good with the franchise.

Halo 1 - Awesome single player and the main seller of the Halo Box. The multiplayer was fun but definitely flawed.
Halo 2 - Single player was average with the worst non-ending in gaming history. I hated BR Troopers with BXR abuse and other glitches.
Halo 3 - Average single player which actually ended. I love Halo 3's multiplayer.
Halo ODST - Average single player. If I remember correctly Halo 3's multiplayer was dead at this point.
Halo Reach - Average single player. I liked the multiplayer but equipment was sorely missed with abilities not giving me much enjoyment.

2 very good games with way more average.
---
Ad Hominem.