Much as I disagree with your views on 4 (sans the characters that aren't the Didact are OK and MC's armour), I'm more referring to their attitudes to making the games. Halo has become much more a commercially minded venture. Maybe Halo Wars and Halo 3: ODST were deemed disappointments by the executives at Microsoft, but Reach, 4 and the MCC[footnote]On the bright side, I hate Halo 4 slightly less because of my Master Chief Collection play through of it, but only slightly[/footnote] all rubbed me the wrong way in the singleplayer department, all feeling like brand marketing to ape popular franchises and techniques of the AAA industry[footnote]Weirdly enough, though, Gears of War: Judgment (a.k.a. Gears 4 but not really) seemed to use the cynical design as a strength to change the pace but keep the identity of the franchise. A shame Halo 4 didn't do that.[/footnote].Darth Rosenberg said:I'd dispute that rather heartily; I've been playing since CE, and I thought 4 was terrific, especially in terms of writing and character. Absolutely cracking score, too, and I think it's the best Chief armour design (and animation/performance capture) yet.Evonisia said:...but, have you played any of the Halo games from Reach onwards? Neither Bungie nor 343 care about the integrity of the series anyway.
Multiplayer has a better time surviving that kind of development, though, which is why I'm generally not as down as I should be on their decision making lately.