I enjoyed destiny and destiny 2 but you could definitely feel them slipping, especially the fumble where they straight up removed parts of destiny 2.

Tried marathon on a free weekend and it was fine but there are so many other games that are better than fine and doing similar things. The only thing it had going for it was the bungie gunplay which is still as solid as ever.

Infinite was a solid base that they just didn't do anything with. The campaign felt incomplete and the multiplayer took years to get to the number of features that Halo 3 launched with, but the bones were good. If it had launched in a more complete state and the new campaigns were actually developed, it probably would have been great. However, Microsoft's stubborn insistence on only using contractors and only for six months at a time made the whole concept untenable. For that matter, it's driving the entire company into the ground.

It was.....ok. it had a good reception but no staying power because it was ok at best. They stopped working on updates too, i think a year into the 10 year project or whatever it was supposed to be.

Yeah Bungie today is a shell of their former selves. They just did a whole video basically saying "We know we suck, we're sorry. We'll get better and make better games." but I ain't holding my breath.

"what if we did halo [iteration], but with zombies? what do you mean they already have that? they did it when?! great, how the fuck do we innovate now? can't we just add shooting some brown people and call it halo: space black ops?" -Activision ceo, tomorrow

ODST Black Ops

I would argue that it probably does give better odds for it at Activision. They already have CoD. They don't need to turn Halo into CoD. They can just use Halo to do something new.

I think I remember that they made a CoD with like mech suits or something, and a lot more movement mechanics, and it wasn't received well. That's basically what Halo is. Now they can go fully into that without CoD players complaining that it isn't CoD.

I don't have much faith in this, but I do think there's better odds for a better Halo with Activision probably. 343 didn't get it. Activision may not, but doing something new has to be better than continuing to fuck things up over and over.

Sekiro is the exception to that, but that's more on FromSoft than it is on Activision, to the extent that it actually hadn't registered in my mind that Activision was involved with that game at all.

My point is that Activision isn't a studio. It's a publisher. I read Activision said they are forming a new studio for Halo.

I mean, I didn't bring up all of Activisions classic games like Pitfall, just the most recent games they have published since those are most relevant to the topic.

"the era 343 was turning out good games too"

Ok but that never really happened. Ensemble made Halo Wars and Creative Assembly made the sequel which were decent IMO (the first being better IMO). Every other game with the Halo brand under 343 was garbage. Forget about Spartan Strike and Spartan Assault? 343s first game was Halo CE Anniversary, which was horrendously bad, so I suppose it is poetic in a way that Halo Studios, which only survived long enough to drop a single game, would die with yet another rehash of Halo CE.

Except for maybe Fireteam Raven, only because I never had the chance to play it, 343 never had an "era of making good games." Halo 2A was pretty good but it launched in the very broken MCC which took them years to fix.

4,5, and Infinite were the absolute low points of Halo, with Infinite being the best of the three only because of the art direction. But they are all far below Bungie-era Halo games.

but that was roughly in the era 343 was turning out good games too

What, HALO 4?