Indeed, and they did the right thing, the hero died.

The hero dying is pretty cliche. I don't want to see him die, nor do I want to see him live the rest of his life as a killing machine. I could definitely see the chief become a high ranking officer as an old man.

Story was good, but for some reason I didn't enjoy the gameplay as much as the first 4. Though some things were good, others lacked heart I felt.

@above: Yes the hero dying is cliche, but at least you knew from the start he was [censored] along with everyone else. They didn't make you play through it, while you were sitting there thinking "omg, he's gonna make it!!"

Hero dying cliche?

Have you heard of Holywood or the game industry?

The hero dying is cliche I agree, but the hero miraculously surviving everything that is thrown at him time and time again can be a bit contrived sometimes. As writers, the halo team must find it difficult to decide what to do to avoid both of these.

Probably made Reach as an outlet.

Multiplayer was the main problem.

Single player, only did the ending right imo. Most of the campaign I jsut didnt care about, like Halo 3s more.

Not as cliche as a happy ending. It was also logical (s)he died. 1 spartan, stranded on a covenant infested planet, that is being glassed. Survivng that is just stupid.

What was wrong with the mp?

Halo Reach was the last Halo game made and Halo Wars never left the drawing board with its terrible gameplay. This is the way it should be and that's the way it is. Oh and 343 doesn't exsist.

Are you talking about Reach? Cause I am not, and we already knew from the start the team was going to die.

What... are you talking about?

Who cares about how Reach ended? If you read the book you would have known basically everyone died, plus Chief is basically the last spartan alive, even though in some books there's several more.

Reach was fun for a day, and Anniversary was fun for a couple minutes. I'm done with the Halo series, so enjoy it everybody!

Honestly, im not sure. I just enjoyed Halo 3's alot more.

Is it cause no one plays custom games in reach? I remember in Halo 3 when you could just join anyone's custom game. I was sad that it didn't happen in reach, because the forge was so much better.

My problem with Reachs story was how disconnected it was. Reach was the military capital of the UNSC and home of the SPARTAN-II program and whats defending it?
Three frigates and a ship building yard. Whats attacking? A couple of corvettes and a cloaked super carrier. They don't have a massive fleet or orbital defense stations like Earth? Compared to Halo 1: "A dozen Covenant superior battleships against a single Halcyon class cruiser, I'm content with 3....make that 4 kills."
Reach did not really begin until Exodus. And Kats death was just plain stupid.

The problem with Halo Reach is that nobody wants to play customs. My friends and I have a bunch of awesome maps and we just play 3 team FFA and it gets really boring. Also, Armor Lock ruined the game for me. There is nothing more aggravating than being stuck by a noob just to have them go into armor lock. So incredibly dumb. If you go onto MP right now there are either teams that have been playing with each other since day one and are some rank that I don't even recognize and they just rush the crap out of your team of randoms. The only way to play is if you have a team otherwise you're just bait for the people who have logged weeks of game play.

I played a great deal of Halo with my friends but the game has lost all desire of wanting to play because the MP died because everybody went to CoD and only the diehard fans are still playing (which doesn't seem like a whole lot).

I'm pretty sure after Jorge goes, a huge ginormous fleet enters, but I agree where was the UNSC

EDIT: quoted the wrong post.

Im talking about what the series is and should be, without the money milking games.

You just keep on telling yourself that.

I will because I absolutly love the game series. and bungie.

If you love the series, why would you immediately label Halo 4 as trash, for all we know it could be 10 times better than the first 3 halos. There is no proof supporting it or disproving it.

This is starting to seem less like a halo 4 discussion and more like "which halo game's do you like/hate" discussion, I've only seen a few mentions of halo 4 here (I've also noticed a large amount of hate too)

Then lets change it.

In multilayer I think the ranking system should be similar to halo 3's. So only people who are good at the game can look awesome.

Personally I'd also like to see something other than "lets kill each other while occasionally doing an objective" type of gameplay. For all the faults COD has, I love nazi zombies and would even encourage the devs to make a stand alone nazi zombies game. I just prefer teamwork and tactical gameplay, Halo was always more every man for himself, even on team death match in my experience. I'd love it if you could just battle a hoard of flood/robot dudes/aliens or a mixtures of the three for as long as possible or even something like Co-Op Black-ops/Spec-Ops mini missions. For some one who couldn't care less about online ranking, this would add a huge amount of re-playability to the game and keep it on my shelf rather than the trade in pile like so many other games.

I agree, even though every game that has some survival will complain about it. I also would like more games like invasion, those are the best, especially if there is teamwork.